toptermpaper.com

The purpose of this explanatory research was to study how gender socialisation influences gender inequality. For the analysis, we used unstructured. It was a qualitative study and it was supported by some closed ended questions, which had helped me to do a quantitative analysis as well, that allows a better understanding on the topics. After the analysis, there will the discussion chapter and some recommendation.

Our major finding upon this research is that, gender socialisation leads to enlarge gender inequality. But however, it helps women to maintain their primary roles which help to maintain a healthy society.

Since birth, children are expected to have a few of the qualities, apart from the physical ones, that we expect of human beings “they cannot walk or talk, they don’t know how to eat, to drink, to go to toilet, and they don’t have any idea on politics or sport. In a sociological perspective, human beings are not created in a physical manner only, but they are socially constructed (Moore, 1997). If people were left on their own after birth, merely being fed and physically cared for, they would not develop into recognizable human being. They would not be able to talk, perhaps even to walk, to laugh, or to understand other. In effect, they would merely be animal.

The process of socialization is mainly divided into two parts. Firstly, there is the primary socialization, which takes place between the individual and the family itself. It relates to the transmission of culture, norms and values from one generation to the next one. Gradually they learn to internalize the correct pattern of behavior, and girls are encouraged to follow the behavior of their mother while boys will be encouraged to imitate their father. Secondly, there is the secondary socialization, where socialization is being shaped by the mass media and school. Children learn proper behavior for girls and boys through parents, the media, the school and other sources of socialization

Gender role socialization may be define as a lifelong process whereby individual learns to internalize the values, attitudes, motivations, and behavior according to their sex which is acceptable and which is regarded to be fair in their culture. Gender role socialization takes place from earliest childhood through adolescence and throughout all social interactions in which we participate.

As soon as a child is born, the members of the society begin to influence and mould the child’s beliefs and personality. What changes human beings from animals into the social actor (a term to describe people living in society) whom we recognize as member of society, is the process of socialization. This socialization process begins in childhood, but continues throughout life. The growing child, through contact with others of the society, gradually learns the language, beliefs and behavior of the group in which he/she is brought up. The values and behavior of groups vary, so that the socialization process is different from one society to another.

The growing up of boys and girls, that is, members of the different sexes; their socialization process is not the same irrespective of different cultures we may have (Commonwealth of learning, 2010).

Boys and girls are socialized differently, which can be explained by the “gender socialization”. That is; boys and girls are expected to behave differently, that is according to their gender roles. Task assignment is generally based on the appearance of the genital and the society’s expectation of gender role from different sexes (Wallen and Hasser, 2009) For example: boys are encouraged to play with gun, making him understand that he has no right to fear, but he should rather be strong and aggressive. Whereas, girls are encouraged to play with dolls and kitchen sets miniatures. This is to make the girls understand that she has to be docile, submissive, caretakers, and so on. This is how gender socialization is being socially constructed.

Hence, the gender roles are socially constructed and are considered to be classified in a hierarchical manner, as a male-advantaged gender hierarchy (Wood & Eagly, 2002). The roles that are attributed to men, were often those that make them superior, in form of getting access in controlling resources and in the decision making power, rendering men not only superior dispositional attributes via correspondence bias (Gilbert, 1998), but also higher status and authority as society progressed.

1.3 Problem statement

The process of socialization is a must for each individual in order for him/she to be able to inculcate the society’s norms, values and culture. But, socialization according to sex differentiation, it reinforce gender inequality in our society. Hence gender socialization is being socially constructed and it shows these gender inequalities which had ever been taught to the children since childhood and they develop stereotypical conceptions of both genders, and begin to use these conceptions to organize their knowledge and behavior. Therefore, the enlargement of gender inequality is increasing day by day without arousing anyone’s awareness and this seems to be normal.

1.4 Aims:

The aim of this dissertation is to study how gender socialization within the nuclear family reinforces gender inequality between the rural and the urban within the Mauritian society. It is the study how gender roles are assigned to both sexes and how it impacts males’ dominance and women’s subordination.

1.5 Objectives:

To conduct a comprehensive literature review on gender socialization and gender inequality.

To analyze how gender socialization between boys and girls differ within family.

To determine the unconscious trend within family and its direct impact on gender inequality.

To investigate about the relation this may exist between gender socialization and gender inequality, in the Mauritian Society.

To propose recommendations and this may help to reduce gender inequality and how to improve gender socialization.

1.6 FLOW OF DISSERTATIONS

Chapter 2 focuses on the literature review and gives insights and ideas about gender socialisation and gender inequality, about different views and perspective, different researcher and in the context of Mauritius. This chapter provides profound discussions about how these technologies have become a must in the life of these teenagers.

Chapter 3 provides a complete description of the approach of the approach of the research methodology. The techniques to collect the data within families are also presented. The difficulties encountered in gathering the data are also pointed out.

Chapter 4 presents the analysis and findings from the data collected from the respondents and give an indication about the main issues emerging from this topic.

Chapter 5 ultimately concludes the dissertation and deals with the recommendations.

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0 INTRODUCTION

In literature review section, it will be based on many researchers’ views and analysis, which will explain the relationship between gender socialization and gender inequality. We will see if ever the process of socialization between boys and girls are the same, and if “no”, therefore to which extent it is differ. Different researcher will explain as well the relationship between gender socialization and gender inequality.

Gender socialization is the way how males and females are socialized differently, according to their specific sex and specific task are assigned to specific sexes, which gradually leads to gender inequality.

2.1 Theories on Gender Socialistion and Gender Inequality

According to the functionalist (2012), they argued that gender inequality should exist in a society. Women’s role is to stay at home in order to socialize their children, so that society can progress. Parson (1955) called the role of women within the family as expressive. Therefore it is their duty to stay at home and to take care of their children. Parsons (1995) argued that women are more suited to stay at home and to look after the socialization of the children because they give birth and are naturally closer to their children. The fact that women give birth and become mother is an important relationship towards their children. The functionalist also stated that children are psychologically damaged by the absence of their natural mother or mother substitute, during their early years. Therefore, men and women are socialized in different ways in order for them to learn their roles when they will become adult (Macionis, 2000).

According to Talcott Parson (1955), inequality should exist in our society. It is for the benefit of women due to the expressive role that they are assigned. Thus, referring Oakley (1974) argument on gender socialization which enlarges gender inequality in society, but according to Parson (1955) viewed on gender inequality; the process of gender socialization should be continued.

A study of Murdock (1949), a functionalist, in 224 societies, argue that man do hunting, heavy work and engage in welfare, while women do the gathering, cooking, repairing clothes and carrying water. This result from practical reasons that men are stronger and they are not burdened by pregnancy and nursing children. Murdock (1949) argued that there are sexual divisions of labour that exist between men and women due to their biological differences.

On the other side, Gilman (2012), they argued that the gender inequality had develop since childhood, through the process of socialization, where boy are encourage to be aggressive whereas girls are taught to docile. They state that the female subordinate on society, result from the emergence of private property (Engels, 1972). In order to pass the wealth, men need to control women; to impose their power (Engels, 1972). Therefore, according to Marxist (Sharon Smith, 1997), women are exploited at work and as well at home, because of the capitalist society. The Marxist and the Socialism (n.d.) theory argued that in order to stop the gender inequality, the capitalist society must be replaced by the communist society. This is because; there will be equal opportunities and no discrimination for neither toward males nor females.

Gender inequality has been due to the process of gender socialization (Gilman 2012). In Mauritius itself, a friend of my dad, living at Camp de Masque Pave, owned a field of pineapple. He said that in his field and in general, women are paid less than men even when they are both performing the same job.

2.2 Biological v/s Social Constructions

There is difference between sex and gender. Sex refers to the biological differences of their genital between both males and females. Whereas gender, it is socially constructed and both males and females are expected to have different behavior rather than being the investable result of biology. Kessler and Mckenna (1978) argue that the way to which society sees people as male or female: the society is already molding the gender role of males and females.

According to Kessler and McKenna (1978), they study how both males and female are differently allocated. Through the studying of transsexuals, this reveals that people who seen biological normal but who feel themselves to be members of the opposite sex. Normally gender and genitals are equated with each other: the connection between males and females are taken for granted. There is lots of evidence which are puts together so that a gender attribution can be made by the observer. People with the appearance and behavior of a female or male will simply be assumed to have appropriate genitals.

The existence of transsexuals means that this assumption is not always accurate. Biologically males, sometimes live as, and are accepted as females.

How then do people decide what gender another person is? According to Kessler and McKenna (1978), there are four factors:

Content of manner of the speech

The way, into which people communicate, both verbal and non verbal communication, are taken into account. Some male-to-female transsexuals have socialized themselves to appear as women and by putting more inflection in their voice and by having more mobile facial movement when talking. Some will [resent themselves as “miss”, to settle any doubt there might be in an observer’s mind.

Public physical appearance

Another important factor in gender attribution is public physical appearance. For ex., female-to-male transsexuals may disguise their breast by wearing baggy clothing or by using strapping.

Past life

The past life’s information that people may provide will help in determining gender attribution. Again, transsexuals have to be careful to avoid suspicion.

Private body

Usually there is a problem in keeping the body covered, but transsexuals may need to avoid certain situations (such as visiting beaches or sharing rooms with others) if they have not change their sex physically.

Talking on the identity of a sex to which they do not belong biologically is difficult and demanding for the transsexuals. For most people, hormones, chromosomes, genitals and gender attributed to them will all coincide. Nevertheless, the exception studied by Kessler and McKenna (1978) demonstrate that even the most basic division; that between male and female, can be seen as being socially constructed.

Kessler and McKenna (1978) argued that process of socialization is still encouraging and enlarging the sex inequality. Even if the society is fighting for gender equality and women’s right, however if the socialization process is not revised, it will be difficult to have gender equality.

2.3 The concept of masculinity

Masculinity had been described as the right way of being an adult male in your society, and the gender socialization of each society varies, Gillmore (1990), argued that masculinity is not only determined by sex but is socially constructed as well. . They state that answer to manhood is linked to the culture of society.

Gilmore (1990) suggests that there are three typical features of masculinity found in the most societies:-

Man: the impregnator

Men’s role is to impregnate women. Therefore, men are expected to take the decision in courtship and sexual encounters. There in competition between men for access to women. Gilmore (1990) give an example in the Turk Islands in the South Pacific, “the Trukese man must be the initiator, to orgasm time and again”. If he fails, the women laugh at him and him and the man is shamed. In Sicily, a real man must have big testicular.

Man: the provider

Men are expected to provide for them and their off spring. In the Mediterranean, Gilmore (1990) argue that “the emphasis on male honor as a domestic duty is widespread” and moreover, in the traditional Greek peasant village, the honor of the fathers rests upon their ability to provide their daughters with large dowries.

Man: the protector

Finally, the way to which men are look like, is the protector. Being only the impregnator and the provider is not enough. They must be a protector for their family as well. Men must protect his family from any dangers and other men where threats may arise. Gilmore (1990) another example, that is in the Sikh Jats of the Punjab adhere strongly to the concept of Izzat, which is a philosophy of life which reflects their paramount concern for male power, in which “a man’s duty is to be stalwart in the defense of his family”.

2.4 Gender Socialisation between males and females

Oakley (1974) stated that how gender socialization in our modern’s industrialization society mold the behavior of boys and girls in different ways, since childhood. She argued that that there are four main ways through gender roles are assigned:

Firstly, there is the manipulation of self concept Oakley (1974), for example: pink color is given to girls whereas blue color is given to boys.

Secondly the direction of girls and boys towards different objects and toys are being canalized in different ways Oakley (1974). Boys are encouraged to play with guns and cars, while girls were encouraged to play with dolls and domestic appliances miniature. Thus, trough canalization, boys are encouraged to have more power than girls, while girls are encouraged to be more docile and caretaker.

Thirdly, there is the “verbal appellation” Oakley (1974), such as “naughty boy” and “beautiful or good girl”. Therefore, these verbal appellations make children identify themselves as a girl should be good and a boy can be naughty.

And finally, different sexes are direct to different activities Oakley (1974). For example: girls are encouraged towards domestic task like cooking, and boys towards masculine task, like washing cars.

Gender socialization starts at birth. It is the process where the individual learn the culture, the norms, and the right pattern of behavior of the society, according to their gender. The process of socialization shaped the behavior of the individual. Different treatment was given to different sexes. In other words, the behavior of boys and girls were dictating by the society’s beliefs, norms and culture. A small story: a young lady will have her first child. When people asked her whether she prefer either a boy or a girl, she has no preferences. There was a grandmother who was near to here, simply reply: “Oh, hopefully it will be a boy” (Unicef for Children, n.d.) Gender socialization take place in an unconscious manner, that people don’t even realize that later, it often leads to male dominance and female subordination; that is gender inequality. At an early age, children start to differentiate between male and female. Boys are expected to be brave, have no fear, no cry, unassertive and strong. Despite, girls are taught to be assertive, kind, docile, submissive and “ladylike”. Consciously or unconsciously, there gender inequality as a result gender socialization towards girls. As result, female are being discriminate in term of care they receive toward the availability to “nutritious foods and health care”, thus it creates a feeling that they have to be treated differently than males.

2.5 Culture and socialisation

Patriarchy is still dominating because it is mostly a transmission of culture in our society and it is very difficult to stop gender inequality. Hence, if socialization was made equally between male and female, there would be no patriarchy society. The process of gender socialization between boys and girls, consciously or even unconsciously, it is leading to an enlargement in gender inequality.

Four factors will be explained by Germaine Greer (The Whole Women, 2000), and this will show how patriarchy is maintaining:

Men are more advantageous in sexuality compared to women, that is sexual freedom are for the benefit of man. “There is still and overwhelming emphasis in heterosexuality on the penetration of the vagina by the penis, and an increasing expectation that women will service male sexual fantasies”. The more subtle and varied ways which women gain sexual pleasure are neglected.

Society is still encouraging women to be obsessively concerned with their physical appearance and public image that is to be well dressed and have a well toned figure. For example, women have to shave their legs and their armpits so as to match to the norms and cultures of the society.. In other words, women are simply not allowed to be themselves.

Male dominance leads women in a position so that female to be afraid of man.

Men hate women. Women have very little idea about this hatred. Males’ hatred toward women is a norm. Greer (2000) will argue that “all men hate some women some of the time” and “some men hate all women all the time”. According to her research, she reveal that a quarter of women have experienced domestic violence from male partners. Greer (2000) gives some examples where McDonald was “viciously beaten, raped and attacked with a rusty pick by her male partner”. Furthermore, Jacqueline Newton was attacked by her husband, “who poured hydrochloric acid and paint stripper over her”.

Gender socialization, is shaped by the society itself. Different societies have different ways in the gender socialization process. It depends from cultures, norms and values. Gender socialization, referring to men and its masculinity, there is only a few who attached different meanings to it. Societies can work with a wide variety of definitions of masculinity. For example, in “Djibouti, Mbouti, the concept of masculinity does not require men to be providers and protectors. In Tahiti, men are encouraged to be timid and passive just like women” (Gillmore, 1990).

Hence, the gender socialization starts till birth and it is a continual process. For example: in the east African Samburu tribe (Haralambos and Holborn, 2004), males have to demonstrate their mascunility by showing that they are braves, which is during their adolescents, at the age of 14 to 15. The first test is a circulation ritual which is performed without anesthetic. The boy must not flinch, despite the pain as his foreskin is cut off, or “he is forever shamed as a coward”. Later in manhood the male proves himself by rustling cattle from other tribes, this runs the risk of being caught and beaten or even killed by the victims of the rustling. However, it confirms that the male has become manly; it makes him attractive to females, and shows that he will be able to take care of a family.

It is the culture who will decide whether to encourage gender inequality or not. This will be done through the transmission of the socialisation process, which is transmitting from generation to generation.

2.5 Mauritian Culture: Gender Socialisation v/s Gender Inequality

Mauritius long ago, in the traditional society that is for my grand parents or even for my parents, these differences was clearly shown. It was argued that the patriarchy role will be given to their son, which is the inheritance of the father to the son. The father will bring the son to the field, hence; the role of the father is gradually delegated to the son and also all the welfare of the family, it will be the son who will possess it. Whereas the main role of the girl is to stay at home, to help the mother, to learn to cook, to do household chores, to be a care taker. All these are the process of socialization, according to their appropriate gender. It is the son who will inherit all the wealth and property after the death of his parent, whereas the girl had learned to be submissive, caretakers, because one day she will leave his family and get married. She will become a wife and have to manage her household; afterwards a mother and will have to take care of her child. This is the example of my family itself, that of the generation of my parents and my grand parents. Hence, this resume a bit about what Parson (1955) had argued according to the female’s gender role.

In Mauritius, the emerging labor market needs skill and qualification in the scientific and technological field which many of the qualified women do not possess. According to Cartel (1994), he surveyed on Mauritius, revealed that women were far from occupying an equal position with men in the labor market. This means that there is skill discrimination in terms of wages towards women.

From Cartel’s (1994) research itself, the percentage of women’s participation in the labor force is 44.5%, lower than men. It is noted that within the manufacturing sector, women are largely concentrated. There are both vertical segregations, where men are generally at the top level and women generally at the bottom of the company, and the horizontal segregations, where the women concentrated in certain occupation which are forced to be women’s job, for example; secretary’ nursing, pre-primary school’s teacheraˆ¦ That is why according to the process of socialization, female gender are taught to be docile, care takers, hence this will help her in the future, for ex. in her job as a nurses.

With the process of gender socialization, the state, whether, internationally and locally, had found the gap between men and women and they acknowledge that there is gender inequality in our society. This had been caused due to the differences in the process of socialization between both male and female. Therefore, some policies had been taken in order to reduce the gap between both sexes.

I will base myself in line with the Common Country Assessment, Mauritius (May 2000). In 1995, Mauritius has signed an agreement with the Commonwealth Plan of Action on Gender and Development in regarding some measures which should be implemented in order to meet the objective of gender equality.

Since 1998, in order to decrease the gap between the both sexes, a Gender bureau has been implemented by the Ministry of Women, Family Welfare and Child Development (MWFCD), through the Gender Management System.

In recent years, women in Mauritius, was mainly depending on their husband. Many were illiterate and they were found within the primary sectors, in the agricultural and textile industry. Furthermore, even if there are at the secondary sector, still women are occupying second position in their particular sector. Job with a high wages, like, prime minister, director, CEO, and so on, it is mainly reserved for men.

2.6 Conclusion

Even measures are taken to reduce gender inequality, the problem is: if gender socialization is not revised, male dominance will continued. Through gender socialization, the patriarchy society is still maintaining. To have gender equality, socialization between boys and girls should be quite the same; otherwise, working toward gender equality would be in vain.

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
3.0 Introduction

Socialization is a must for each and every human being. But societies are fighting against gender inequality, because gender socialization favored mostly male. Sex discriminations and gender inequality is one among the social problem and a main cause gender socialization. Thus it is becoming an alarming problem and this is the main reason of conducting such a study. The study is being carried out into three steps:

Definition of research objectives

Development of research plan

Collection of information

Once the objectives have been specified, a most suitable research plan is devised so as to collect the desired information. The design of a research plan basically rests on:

Locating the most appropriate data sources.

Devising the right research approach.

Using the most relevant research instrument.

Adopting the most unbiased sampling procedure.

3.1 Data Sources

In this research, the information to be gathered will be qualitative nature since it deals with gender socialization as quantitative method will also be used to facilitate our research, since based on how boys and girls are socialized, and gender socialization in relation to gender inequality. Harmmersley (1996) argues that while we used both methods like qualitative and the quantitative it helps to cross check the findings produced by the other methods.

In order to gain a better understanding of the current situation to the extent on how gender socialization may lead to enlarge inequality, both secondary and primary data do necessary, in order to gain a better understand of the subject and to have a good groundwork to build on when collecting primary data.

3.2.1 Secondary data

Secondary data is the data that have been already collected and accessible from other sources. The aim was to use as relevant and updated information as possible. In this study, the secondary data were obtained were from the University of Technology’s library; from previous studies made by undergraduates and postgraduates, from textbooks, and from publications and journal articles; like EBSCO and Emerald.

3.2.2 Primary data

Primary data is data that has not been previously published that is the data is derived from a new research study and collected at the source. Thus the aim of our research is to come out with a primary data; about a study on how gender socialization contributes to gender inequality within the extended modified family.

3.3 Qualitative Research

A qualitative research method is know as a category type of research model herby data in the form of descriptive narratives like field notes, recordings or other transcriptions from audio and videotapes and other written records or pictures or film analyzed.

3.3.1 Strength of qualitative research

A qualitative research method allows researcher to have an in-depth study of a social unit.

Researchers normally use the qualitative research methods since they exemplify a common belief that they can provide a ‘deeper’ understanding of social phenomena than would be obtained from a purely quantitative data. Hence, it helps to generate new theories.

Qualitative research helps to recognize social phenomena which have been ignored by most or all previous researchers and literature. In other words, the aim is to present people on their own terms and tries to represent them from their perspective.

3.3.2 Drawbacks of Qualitative Research

Normally it is difficult to generalize the problem under a qualitative research method as fewer people are studied and the sample is limited compared to a quantitative research methodology. As a result, the study cannot be representatives and it is difficult to aggregate data and makes systematic comparison.

Moreover with a qualitative research method the problem arises when the researcher goes categorizing the events or activities described. In other words, this is known as the problem of reliability. Reliability refers to “to the degree of consistency with which instances are assigned to the same category by different observers or by the same observer in different occasions” (Hammersley, 1992:67).

As qualitative studies provide readers with little more than brief persuasive data extracts, the problem of consistency particularly arises because of shortage of means.

Also there may be the problem of validity in such research studies. Validity is another word for truth. Sometimes one doubts the validity of the researcher has clearly made no attempts to deal with contrary cases.

3.4 Triangulation

It is the use of both qualitative and the quantitative methods. Harmmersley (1996) argues that while we used both methods like qualitative and the quantitative it helps to cross check the findings produced by the other methods. In my study, I am using the qualitative method, but quantitative method also will help me in achieving my objectives of this dissertation.

3.5 Reasons why opted for “modified extended family”?

I would like first all to define the “modified extended family”. In twentieth century, in Mauritius, we have mostly the modified extended family, and fewer the other types of families; that’s why our study will base on the socialization process within the modified extended family. The modified extended family is types of family which is similar to the nuclear family, having two generations living under the same roof, but they maintain regular contact through regular visits, phone, social networks, letters/mails (even they live in the Mauritius or abroad), on living the same yard but different houses, or in the same street.

3.6 Research Approach

The most suitable approach to this particular study was t

It is crucial to gain an understanding of what social construction is, in order to assess its influence on human bodies. However it is difficult to operationalise social construction in literal terms. Social construction encompasses a multitude of elements, Hacking (2002) notes, ‘social construction is a kettle of many very different kinds of fish’. Typically however, social construction is concerned with the ways in which society has conceptualised ideals and expectations, looking at this in relation to specific areas of sociological interest. For sociologist when looking at the body their main concern is with ‘the process of… transforming a biological entity through social action’ Chris Shilling (2003).

‘Members of a society construct their bodies in ways that comply with their gender status and accepted notions of masculinity and femininity. That is, they try to shape and use their bodies to conform to their culture’s or racial ethnic group’s expectations’. (Lorber and Martin 2005)

This essay will look at the ways in which the body is a social construction, with particular focus on the extent in which individuals in society are willing to perform to socially constructed ideals. It is important to recognise that social construction of the body is a global phenomenon; however this essay will look at westernised social construction of the body in particular.

By looking primarily at the social construction of femininity, a subject which has typically been theorised extensively when looking at the body, an attempt will then be made to look at the social construction of masculinities and the aging body, in relation to the complex role that society’s expectations have to play.

The body is often seen as something which is ‘straightforwardly biological, ‘natural’ and given.’ (Macionis and Plummer, 2005). Unsurprisingly different types of bodies can be seen in terms of shapes, sizes and physical build; however there is an increasing notion of what aesthetically is socially acceptable, with women in the media industry in particular being promoted in a certain way. ‘In affluent Western societies, slenderness is generally associated with happiness, success, youthfulness and social acceptability’ (Grogan, 1999). This notion could be said to have largely contributed to the fact that, increasingly, women are dissatisfied with their bodies. For Grogan (1999), media, as an industry, depicts the ideology that slenderness is preferred. This factor no doubt, has impacted the rise in eating disorders and women’s willingness to have cosmetic surgery in modern times, in order to fit such ideals of slenderness which are conceptualised in magazines and television programmes. ‘In western culture dieting, breast enhancement and face-lifts are ways that women have changed their appearance to fit ideals of feminine beauty’ (Kivisto, 2005)

Grimlin (2000) looks negatively at the role of cosmetic surgery, as a multi-million pound industry, with the notion that women’s bodies are treated as commodities, ‘Cosmetic surgery stands, for many theorists and social critics, as the ultimate symbol of invasion of the human body for the sake of physical beauty.'(Grimlin 2000). This view could be criticized, in the idea that many women who choose to have surgery, rather than to fit in with social constructions and therefore demands of society, do so in order to express their own personal individualism and identity, perhaps advocating their rights of freedom to adapt their own body if it pleases them to do so. Featherstone and Turner (2001) note ‘Bodies have become the ultimate vehicle for writing ones identity.’; this looks at anything from the clothes and makeup an individual wears, to self decoration through tattoos, piercings and cosmetic surgery. It is questionable to what extent women ‘self decorate’ in order to fit the stereotypical views of social expectations of what is ‘beautiful’, or to oppose these views of conventional attractiveness, both however implicitly relate to the body as a social construction, either in a way that conforms to, or rebels against ideas of socially constructed beauty.

Sexuality is closely linked with that of the female body, with socially constructed expectations of sexual femininity, ‘Women are expected to be nuturant and emotionally giving, willing to subordinate their own desires to please men and their own interests to take care of children, Therefore women’s bodies should be yielding and sexually appealing to men when they are young and plumpy maternal when they are older.’ (Kivisto 2005). This mass of generalizations, and assumptions, (that women are heterosexual, that all women want children, that women will forget about their own pleasures to please men), highlights the typical socially constructed views of western culture. It is therefore important to notice a change in women’s sexual role through feminist ideas which reflect a modernized culture, with a new type of woman emerging in the 21st century. Through ‘promoting sexual autonomy’, feminist’s attempt to, ‘advocate women’s control of their sexuality and reproduction.’ (Macionis and Plummer 2005), making their bodies less socially constructed to please male expectation.

It is interesting to look at the social construction of the body in relation to the process of aging, as commonly, especially in traditional thesis, the bodily aging process has been referred to as a biological one, without consideration of its social relevance,

‘Popular stereotypes about old people, usually centered around the inevitability of old age and its manifestation as physical decrepitude from which culture irrelevance could be inferred. Old age was therefore out-side the social because it was an essentially biological process.’ (Tulle-Winton 2000).

With this in mind, Christopher A. Faircloth (2003) looks explicitly at the social construction of the aging process on people’s bodies. Reinserting that older bodily images are ones which are to be looked at with equal importance to younger women. Faircloth (2003), gives a detailed examination of the sexual attractiveness of older aged women (than that which is traditionally conceptualised in the media), concluding that there need to be seen as sexually attractive is still of extreme significance. Faircloth looks at the visual representations of older women through the realms of film and photography for example, with specific reference to a loss of sexuality in the representation of the older generation in society. Similarly Itzin (1986) states, ‘Rarely are women portrayed as capable and independent, never as sexually attractive’, (with the word ‘women’ in this case, referring specifically to that of older women). Itzin notes that societies construction of what is sexually attractive is rarely looked at in relation to that of the older generation.

When looking at the social constructions of femininity and the aging process, it can be seen that menopause is often reflected which considerable negativity, with the term being one which has connotations of a loss of sexuality and the idea that a noticeable change on the youthfulness of a women’s body can be seen. These socially constructed misconceptions, suggest that the menopause directly affects a women’s body, creating wrinkles and bodily sagging, which biologically is not the case (Winterich 2003). In a bid to maintain the socially constructed body which is considered attractive, characteristically one of youthfulness, merchandise, such as hair colouring products, anti-wrinkle creams and an increased number cosmetic surgeries can be seen to be endorsed by the older generation, (Craig Thompson 1995).

Traditionally much theoretical focus on the social constructions of body, has been on that of femininity; however the social constructions of masculinity can be considered similarly,

‘western societies expect men to be aggressive initiators of action and protectors of women and children, therefore their bodies should be muscular and physically strong’, increasingly ‘Men life weights, get hair transplants, and undergo cosmetic surgery to mould their bodies and faces to a masculine ideal’ (Kivisto 2005)

This observation of men in the 21st century shows masculinity of the body to be concerned with that of aesthetic pride in a similar way to women, however there is less pressure on the male community to fit the mould of these constructed ideals.

A modernised new man is also represented to fit the ideas of social construction, with the coinage of the phrase ‘heterosexual male’ to highlight the increased notion of male grooming as acceptable in society.

Inevitably this essay only looks at a small spectrum of the features that contribute to the body as a social construction, however a lot can be seen on how the body is effected by the views of society, a body which conclusively is not only ‘biologically constructed’ but also socially.

Discuss with reference to psychoanalytic theories of masculinity.

It is widely argued that Western Societies are currently witnessing a crisis of masculinity. The status of masculinity is changing and this is partially due because the society is changing economically, socially and especially in relation to the position of women. These changes also affect the sphere of consumption and popular culture.

I will examine at first how Freud places a great emphasis on the early relationship of the young boy. This relationship will have important consequences for development. According to Freud, this relationship is overshadowed by the oedipal conflict. Secondly I will go through Klein’s theory about the relationship between the boy and the mother. Contrary to Freud, Melanie Klein emphasis the powerful maternal figure. After that I will explain how masculinity is shaped by social and cultural theories; how and why masculinity is changing. “Masculine” identity as it has been seen formerly within patriarchal cultures as evolved into a new “male”. The roots of a crisis in masculinity are analysed in social theories in terms of a conflict in gender roles. Cultural theories, which intersect with Lacan’s idea, are also important in how the crisis in masculinity has been studied. The rise of feminism has surely encouraged many men to question how they view women. Now that feminism has attacked the patriarchal systems of power and control, masculinity has been left undermined and unsure. Finally I will give an overview on how masculinity is view between men.

To evaluate how masculinity might be in crisis, it is first necessary to examine how psychoanalytical theories assume that boys gain their masculine identity; or in other words how they become men. Freud’s ideas about masculinity developed in three steps. The first one is the idea of continuity between normal and neurotic mental life, the concepts of repression and the unconscious, and the method that allowed unconscious mental processes to be read through dreams, jokes, slips of the tongues and symptoms (Connell, 1995). Freud understood that adult sexuality and gender were not fixed by nature but were constructed through a long and conflict-ridden process. Freud places a great emphasis on the early relationships of the young boy with his parents or caregivers. It is the vicissitudes of these relationships that will have important consequences for development. In Freudian terms, this early relationship is overshadowed by the oedipal conflict. The Oedipus complex is characterized by the desire for one parent and hatred for the other. For boys, the Oedipus complex is the rivalry with the father and terror of castration. Here Freud identified a formative moment in masculinity and pictured the dynamics of a formative relationship.

Freud argued that homosexuality is not a simple gender switch and “a large proportion of male inverts retain the mental quality of masculinity”. The second step in Freud’s analysis of masculinity is the development to gender. He goes further by saying that masculine and feminine currents coexist in everyone. In his final stage, Freud developed his account of the structure of personality, in particular the concept of the superego. The superego is formed in the aftermath of the Oedipus complex, by internalized prohibitions from the parents. Freud gradually came to see it as having a gendered character, being crucially a product of the child’s relationship with the father, and more distinct in the case of boys and girls. This provided the germ of a theory of the patriarchal organization of culture, transmitted from one generation to the next through the construction of masculinity.

The most important processes that occur in early life that influence the construction of the male identity is the oedipal complex. According to Greenson (1968), the idea of disidentification is divided into two processes: firstly a boy must sever the emotional ties he has with the primary caregiver, usually the mother, and secondly he needs to identify with a male role model, usually the father. The role of the father in the masculine identity is seen as crucial by psychoanalysts. Horrocks (1994) sees the role of fathering as an introduction to manhood. He also identify one of the most important functions of the father as to show the young boy that it is possible to live with the mother, to have conflict, fear and guilt. According to Horrocks, the modern damage male is seen as “unfathered”.

The boy’s entry into his ‘masculinity’ can only be achieved through his castration complex which sets in motion his separation from his mother and identification with his father. Freud (1925) explains the castration complex by a few stages. First, the young boy believes that everyone has a penis. Secondly, he discovers that women do not have penises and assumes that they have been mutilated. Thirdly, when he begins to masturbate, he is told that he will be castrated. Fourthly, when he finds that the breast has been removed, he believes that the penis will be next. The Oedipus complex is abolished by the fear of castration.

In contrast to Freud, Melanie Klein argues that is envy of the mother rather than rivalry with the father that impedes psychic changes. The relationship between the boys and the mother has been left undeveloped by Freud. Disagreeing with Freud, about his account of oedipal feelings in relation to the father, she argues that the first signs appear in relation to the mother. In fact, according to Horrocks (1994) the young boy is surrounded by feminine presence throughout his early childhood, and it is important for him to break away and discover a world of men where he can gain his roots of male identity. The central paradox is that men want to escape from womanhood but there is also the desire to become close to a woman. For Klein, ‘masculinity ‘and ‘femininity’ are biologically determined and reinforced during childhood in opposition to Freud who believes that bodies and minds are structured through patterns of cultural power. Klein assumes that the concept of the womb envy is an important component in the male psyche. Minsky (1995) describes how the Kleinian point of view sees the development of male power as being rooted in the fear of the womb. Besides his envy of his mother’s breasts, the young boy also becomes envious of her womb and the power it give to create life. According to Minsky (1995), the phallus saves men and provides a distraction from the womb envy. Klein’s concept of womb-envy is important to understand male misogyny. Boys envious of their mother have to accept that they can never have breasts or a womb. Unconscious womb-envy helps to explain the opposition between ‘nature’ (identified with women) and ‘culture’ (identified with men). Men have to opt for culture because nature, in the sense of giving birth and feeding children from their own bodies, is simply unavailable to them (Minsky, 1996).

Is the notion of a crisis in masculinity new, or it is just that each generation experiences it in different ways? The evidence has been suggesting the latter. As Mangan says “Crisis is…a condition of masculinity itself. Masculine gender identity is never stable; its terms are continually being re-defined and re-negotiated, the gender performance continually being re-staged. Certain themes and tropes inevitably re-appear with regularity, but each era experiences itself in different ways.” (Mangan 1997:4).

Cultural conceptions of masculinity and femininity vary between cultures and alter over historical time. Cultural theories, which intersect with Lacan’s ideas, are important in how the crisis in masculinity has been studied. According to Lacan, the phallus is the central signifier of the sexual difference. The principle of masculinity rests on the repression of feminine aspects and introduces conflict into the opposition of masculine and feminine. Faludi (2000) described the new male as objectified and subject of a sexist consumer culture. In addition, he believes that the man’s secured attachments and relationships with the workplace are no longer powerful and exclusive as they were. Now that the rise of feminism has attacked the patriarchal systems of power and control, masculinity has been left undermined and unsure. Apparently, this rise has left men confused in the way they view women. Faludi strongly believes that this crisis in masculinity can be resolved if both women and men can work together to combat it.

There are a number of contributory factors to the so-called crisis in masculinity. I will be describing some of them.

Maguire (1995) point out that men’s crisis concerned their social role and identity. For her, these uncertainties manifest themselves in violence, increased levels of suicide and abusive behaviour towards them or others. Men are more likely to commit suicide than women. Suicide appears to be triggered by relationship problems, unemployment, drug and alcohol abuse, low self-esteem and mental illness. Many men remain bad at acknowledging and expressing feelings which left them trapped between the old-style macho and the new-man type behaviour requiring a man to be in touch with his feelings.

Social research finds that men are choosing to remain living at home rather than move out on their own (Office of National Statistics, 2000). Whitehead (2002) found out that this evidence prove that men are failing to cope with the new challenges they are facing.

Society is moving from a patriarchal culture, to give way to different masculinities. The rise of feminism, changing family patterns, social concerns about jobs contributed to these changes.

The advent of post modernity has resulted in redundancy, constant job role changes and unemployment for men. According to Beynon (2001) men now suffer deep depression at the loss of the breadwinner role and the status that went with it. He claims that men are falling out of family life in greater numbers and may end up lonely. More men end up isolated socially and psychologically, finding it difficult to ask for help. At least 50% of marriage in UK result in divorce and as Beynon found out men is mostly responsible for marital breakdown.

Nowadays, women have demonstrated that they can bring up children without men. Clare says that “the rise in the number of single mothers suggests not merely that men are inadequate as partners and fathers, but they are simply redundant. Women are asserting that they can convince rear children on their own. They don’t need men to father their children…women can do without them in the workplace. Even more significantly, they can do without them in their beds.” (Clare 2000:100).

A significant number of fathers involved in divorce leave the family home and become non-resident. “The visiting father is a shadowy, displaced figure trying to avoid becoming an ex-father, who stops but does not stay, who is no longer a man of the house, but a visitor who come and goes.” (Clare 2000: 150-1).

Women are seen to be living more successful and fulfilling lives, without relying on their partners. So, the loss of patriarchal authority and the equality in heterosexual relationship have left men disoriented.

In other way, is the notion of a crisis in masculinity new, or it is just that each generation experiences it in different ways? The evidence has been suggesting the latter. As Mangan says “Crisis is…a condition of masculinity itself. Masculine gender identity is never stable; its terms are continually being re-defined and re-negotiated, the gender performance continually being re-staged. Certain themes and tropes inevitably re-appear with regularity, but each era experiences itself in different ways.” (Mangan 1997:4).

The policy exchange think tank makes a compelling argument, for change is needed in such a time of economic uncertainty and Britain’s housing crisis could become stagnate and a generation could pass before resolve is found. The housing minister in England Grant Shapps said the proposal from the policy exchange was ‘blindingly obvious’ but on the other hand Former Deputy Prime Minister Lord Prescott described it on Twitter as ‘sanctioned gerrymandering’ (The Guardian Monday 20th August 2012 http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/aug/20/sell-social-housing-fund-homes) I believe a lot of things have to go to plan for this to follow through, planning procedures, cost of production and lack of delays, its al well and good making this suggestion but I believe its slightly flawed, I do agree with aspects but with the overall plan a lot more research would need done.

Hosing associations have come down very hard on this recommendation to create the largest social house building programme since the 1970’s’ the National Housing Federation described the idea as ‘fundamentally flawed’, some working people cannot afford their own home and with this recommendation warns these people will be out priced even in the private market. National Housing Federation chief Executive David Orr said, ‘It could effectively cleanse many towns of hard working people who simply cant afford the high prices of buying or renting privately'(Rural Services Network 21st August 2012 http://www.rsnonline.org.uk/community/flawed-plan-to-sell-social-housing)

All government has flaws, no matter who is in place, the conservatives who are in a coalition with the Liberal Democrats at this time do not benefit the poorer parts of society. From the 1980’s when Margaret Thatcher was in power it seemed to be the case with social policy the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, when Labour came back into power near the late 90’s I believe they did their best to even out this unfair balance within social society, now that the conservatives are back in power they have not changed their ways, with this policy recommendation the poorest in society will unfortunately bear the effects of this.

Labour claim that the tories are failing to build social housing for the poorest people, under coalition government new social build and has falling by 91%, from 35;600 to 3,305 so for this policy think tank to suggest that 170,000 homes could be built between 2011 to 2015 is a mad suggestion giving that this 91% fall could not just be a one off for one year. Labour believe lack of planning permission and funding may not cause an upsurge any time soon. Also giving that the coalition government cut the capital grant for social housing by 63% in 2010 so why the sudden change in creating the largest social building programme since the 70’s? (http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/aug/28/tories-failing-social-homes-labour)

To back up the claim of this report not helping the poor, the report suggests that it will ‘raise tenants standards of living’ but it does not highlight which tenants and which background they may come from, again John Prescott mentioned on twitter that the report amounted to trying to ‘kick the poor out of the rich areas'(http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/08/20/policy-exchange-report-social-cleansing-council-homes-new-builds_n_1809141.html). I know in Northern Ireland we have had a divide for many years but this report seems to be causing a divide of a different sort one that could eventually have major effects on society in the future.

To back my evidence up more, Liberal conspiracy highlights how the recommendation would make the UK a miserable place to live, with conservative not noticing social housing the last couple of years why is there a sudden urge to become involved in it? It highlights 4 factors why this would make the UK a miserable place the first factor being that communities that are mixed are more at peace with themselves and could live in harmony in an easier way. The second factor being segregated communities make it harder for poorer people to commute to work and would cause a lot more congestion and emission of vehicle fumes. Third factor being that once the social housing is sold it is almost certain that all the money wont be re invested back into social housing and the final factor being that this could cause a political advantage when it comes to elections. All of this worries many parts of society who cannot afford such housing in the future. ( http://liberalconspiracy.org/2012/08/20/policy-exchanges-latest-idea-would-make-the-uk-a-more-miserable-place/)

The policy exchange asks why this idea had never been thought of before why has no one ever suggested this? Well as Jules Birch of Inside Housing explains that it conflicts with policy in the regeneration sector in areas throughout England, it would affect social divisions within education with the sale of housed ‘the good schools’ will become more socially divided and education opportunities will be missed by other children. Most importantly it completely conflicts with any government attempt to maintain mixed communities. (http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/inside-edge/6502506.bloglead?yearmonth=2012.08)

From my own point of view politics destroy society even if a government aims to do good for society in England there is always going to be opposition to a good deed, I believe money is good but money can also mean greed. And selling the housing would generate a great amount but I would not be too sure if that money would be re-invested back into social housing. This can be really frustrating for people especially those with financial difficulties. It’s obvious that the best quality homes are not going to be the cheapest and with the conservative ideology, people from poorer backgrounds cannot be confident with selling off such a large stock of social homes. For society to be equal compromise has to be made in terms of education, type of shops available, and essentially housing and for this document to possibly cause segregation in this area then government has to take a long look at themselves before passing this through Westminster. With a coalition not only one but two parties have to see eye to eye for clarity to be reached in this issue.

Each constituency has different priorities, so MP’s are voting in by how that area lives and what is needed in the area but since the coalition began some politicians have been caught in the middle of a storm, this is especially the case for some Liberal democrats such as Simon Hughes where his constituency is full of social housing and in the past he has had very strong views in this area. But his problem is not the conservatives but his own party colleagues who may back the proposals along with the conservatives, the problem for Simon Hughes is that there is support coming from Liberal democrats such as Andrew Stunnell so Simon may have a political mountain to face in the future. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/wintour-and-watt/2010/nov/22/simon-hughes-council-housing)

Each chapter that is highlighted in the policy is more of a statement of intent rather than a certainty, chapter one does make a valid point with a need for more social housing but is there only one solution? Chapter two states that the public does not agree with expensive social housing and want more homes, this is more a twist on words than the public demanding social housing to end. Being able to define ‘expensive social housing’ in chapter 3 is a very vague term and for taking the expensive housing to be from the ‘half way point of all properties’ I believe that this ideology to be wrong. The next chapter states that ‘20% of social housing is expensive’ is that really such a bad thing? Their proposal wouldn’t really help expenditure costs or saving costs in the future. As for chapter six saying that there will be no negative effects. The way it says it ‘could’ build 80,000 to 170,000 homes is a very vague statement it is a massive uncertainty. The final chapter says ‘wider economic effects are positive’ I don’t believe it is with the strategy that is set out and the fact that the policy think tank says that pushing reform though will help this process makes it even more laughable.

This talk of the ‘Big Society’ is a fairy tale story with the proposals to social housing and the impact of Welfare reform and the ‘bedroom taxes’ which means people may have to downsize their property to they are not hit with an extra charge, there may be a problem in this area given the fact that there is a lack of single social housing occupancy so people will not be able to downsize and there is a problem with the imbalance between the North and south of England with the overcrowding taking place in the south and under occupancy in the North. A blog on the Red Pepper site highlights what they believe what is happening and what they see the future to be, “a carefully planned PR operation by the Conservatives who dominate this Coalition to hide their real intentions of aggressively continuing and deepening the long-term assault on social housing and the welfare state that in many ways defined the Thatcherite project of neoliberalism.” (http://www.redpepper.org.uk/how-the-conservatives-ruined-social-housing/) It is as if the conservatives have always had this plan in the pipeline and it was just a matter of time before they unleashed their idea of a better future for society, but all of society does not agree.

Overall it is clear to see my stance on this policy and my view of the possible future within society in England, common sense has to prevail at some stage, I do understand that there will be people who back this policy and have their arguments for this. Everyone is entitled to their opinion on this topic. At the same time I think it is a good thing that this was released because it has now become a hot topic and people are becoming more and more passionate about social housing, so even though I may not agree with the Think tank, they have at least put effort into the issue so it can become a serious issue and lots of debates will be held to resolve this issue. All this is possible but with another election not taking place until 2015, there may be scary times ahead for those who are the poorest in society.

Topic: Critically examine the development and changes of social values of welfare held by Hong Kong people before and after 1997. What are the factors affecting the changes?

Welfare is “all collective interventions to meet certain needs of the individual and/or to serve the wider interests of society may now be broadly grouped intoaˆ¦ categories of welfare” (Titmuss, 1959). The development in the social values of welfare has always been changing throughout the centuries, particularly the 20th century. In traditional Chinese society, people used to believed that social welfare, or “fuk lei”, was given by kind-hearted philanthropists in society (N. Chow, 1994, p.325). In the early 20th century, the concept of social welfare was still very weak among Hong Kong people. Majority of welfare services were provided by non-government organizations before 1965 (W. S. Chow, 1993, p. 41). The situation changed after the publication of the white paper of the social welfare in 1965. Together with the rise of social worker, more people consider social welfare is part of their civil rights in the following decades. In 1997, the change in sovereignty of Hong Kong and the Asian financial crisis brought a significant impact on the social values of welfare. In the following paragraphs, I will briefly discuss the development of social welfare in Hong Kong and the corresponding social values of welfare, particularly the changes before and after 1997. As will be argued, there are both long term and short term factors that led the changes. The former would be the increasing consideration of civil rights and the latter would be the Asian financial crisis in 1997, the change in sovereignty of Hong Kong and the publication of Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA) Review.

In the early 20th century, majority of people considered welfare was given by kind-hearted philanthropists in society. As Hong Kong was a colony of Britain at that time, the colonial government put their focuses on protecting the British’s interest, particularly the British merchants. Hence, the living environment and welfare of local Chinese were not concerned by the colonial government unless it interfere the interest of British. With this colonial background, local Chinese rationalized the concept of “welfare would not be given by the colonial government”. The Chinese merchants “used their wealth to establish and maintain their reputations and leadership roles through acts of charity” (Leung, 1996, p.3). They set up organizations and gave welfare to the locals. Among these organizations, Tung Wah Hospital was the most noteworthy charitable organization which catered the medical services and welfare needs to the locals. Apart from these organizations, churches and clans’ man association would also give welfare to the locals too.

In the post World War II period, the situation had a slightly change. In the post war period, a large number of non-government or voluntary welfare organizations were set up in Hong Kong. It is important to note that most of these welfare organizations had their parent-bodies overseas. A typical example of these organizations would be the Hong Kong Red Cross. “During this emergency period, the internationally-linked welfare organization had probably done much more than the government in meeting the welfare needs of people” (N. Chow, 1994, p.324). Although the concept of “welfare is given by kind-hearted philanthropists” was weaken, “the majority of the Chinese in Hong Kong are still unable to wipe away the traditional notions of welfare and accept the modern idea that it should be the responsibility of the state to provide the necessary social welfare services” (N. Chow, 1994, p. 325). Meanwhile, a large proportion of population was refugee from mainland China (Due to the civil war in China). Part of them considered Hong Kong is there temporary shelter but not their home. Hence, welfare development would not be their consideration as they expected to leave Hong Kong soon. These factors made there were only little pressure groups would fight for the rights for the locals in that period.

The situation further changed after 1965. In 1965, the colonial government published the White Paper on social welfare. N.Y. Chow (1993) suggests that “to be exact, the beginning of social welfare policy of Hong Kong was after the publication of the first White Paper on social welfare in 1965” (p.41). The White paper was the first government document that discusses social welfare policy in Hong Kong. It explained the welfare development and integrated the experiences from the development. Also, it gives the stands of colonial government toward social welfare policy and reasons that made the government cannot implement comprehensive social policy in Hong Kong. Although the White Paper has been blamed for lacking in-depth discussion on the blueprint of social welfare development and the foreseeable challenges, but this White paper gives a foundation for the further development of social welfare system (W. S. Chow, 1993). The concept of “social welfare” and “government” were no longer dissevering like the past. More people started to integrate “social welfare” into the role of government.

The most rapid change was found in the 70s. There were two major factors that led the change, the “Big Bang” of social policy and the rise of social worker. The “Big Bang” of social policy was initiated by the 25th governor of Hong Kong, Murray MacLehose. “After MacLehose take office the governor in 1972, he had a strong sense of responsibility towards social welfare, under his influence, amendment of social welfare policy was necessary” (W. S. Chow, 1993, p. 52). Apart from it, the increasing social problems (i.e. the riot in 1966 and 1967, Corruption) led the demand for government’s involvement in social welfare further increased. These factors urged the publication of the second White Paper of social welfare in 1973. The aim of the White Paper was giving a five year plan of social welfare development and dividing the responsibility in providing social welfare between government and voluntary organizations. The aspects of social welfare in the five year plan included education, housing, medical service, social allowance, youth services etc. The comprehensive expansion of welfare services increased the involvement of people in social welfare system. The value of “welfare would not be given by the colonial government” was further weakening in this period.

Apart from the “Big Bang” of social policy, the rise of social worker also led to the significant change in social value of welfare. The rise of social worker could be traced back to the professionalization of social work and the implement of professional training at the University of Hong Kong and the Chinese University of Hong Kong in the mid-1960s. In the 1960s, “Fabian Socialism was the most fashionable approach taught in the social work schools of the two universities” (N. Chow, 1994, p.327). Equality, freedom and fellowship are the central values of Fabian Socialism. The social work students in 60s and 70s were strongly influenced by these values. They had a strong sense of “working towards a more equal and justice society”. Hence, when the students became social workers in society, they would try to advocate policies that achieve to these two ideals. More people would consider welfare as a means to achieve an equal society. Meanwhile, the young social workers at that time also stressed on civil rights. They believed that social welfare is one the important parts of civil rights. When they graduated, they would educate and advocate the public to uphold their civil rights through different social actions. As a result, under this influence, it led to the rise of the awareness of welfare system as rights enjoyed by citizen.

Another significant change of social values of welfare could be found in 1997. The major factor that led to the change is the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997. Before the crisis, the economy in Hong Kong was at boom. Majority of people were actively investing in property market and stock market. At that time, people emphasized on material values and short-term time horizon. “Material values are the major criterion used to evaluate the worth of things and people” (C.K. Wong, K. L. Chow & K.Y. Wong, 2001, p.68). Meanwhile, majority of Chinese investor were looking for the maximum benefit in the shortest period of time.

Topley states that many Chinese still prefer to invest in non-industrial property and trade because of the relatively quicker return of capital and profits.

When investing in industry, the overwhelming desire of investors is to look for quick profits by whatever means present themselves as attractive in the short run rather than to look for opportunity for starting long-term investment. (as cited in Lau, 1982, p.70)

As both of the property market and stock market were so flourished, the economic environment enabled people to achieve the above goals simultaneously. This in turn led Hong Kong became one of the wealthiest cities in Asia. The living standard in Hong Kong was one of the highest in Hong Kong history in the early mid 1990s. As most people could sustain their life in the market, they put less consideration on the welfare system. At that time, people would consider social welfare system was only for those who were in need in society, like elderly and disabled people. In other words, despite the underprivileged and the corresponding pressure group, majority in society would not care about the welfare system as they believed they could achieve self-sustentions in market. In general, social welfare development was overwhelmed by economic development at that period.

But a significant change was provoked by the 1997 financial crisis. A great depression in both stock market and property market was provoked by the crisis. Lots of people were bankrupted because of the suddenly fall in the property market. Also, a massive unemployment was accompanied with the economic downturn, particularly in the financial sector. The decline in consumption led to further depression in other non-financial sector. The financial crisis brought two major impacts on the welfare system. First, it led to a significant fall in the tax income of the government. Second, more people fall into the safety net of the welfare system. In other words, it led an increase in demand for welfare services. Simultaneously, it would increase the welfare expenditure of the government. As these two factors happened at the same time, this brought heavy pressure on the financial budget of the government.

At the same period, the sovereignty of Hong Kong changed back to China. One of the problems that foresee by the government is the increase in immigrants from China. In the review report of CSSA that published by the Social Welfare Department, it suggests that the increase in mainland immigrants would lead to an increase application for CSSA. It implies that the government believes that a number of mainland immigrants would rely on the welfare system for livelihood. Before the publication of the report, the government already spread this ideology through news and government press. At that time, the government disclosed different abusive cases of CSSA by the new immigrants. This made the public also be believed the new immigrants would bring pressure to Hong Kong welfare system.

The economic downturn, mainland immigrants, together with the foreseeable aging population, these made the government believed a review for welfare system is necessary. As the government wanted to tighten the budget for social welfare expenditure, the publication of the review report was a means of government to the public support. This report brought a momentous impact on the social value of welfare. In particular, there were more people believed that abusive cases are common in the welfare system after the publication of the report. For example, the report suggested the level of benefits for four-person household is high. The average monthly payment for a four-person household increased in 120% from 1980s to 1990s. But the median wage of workers only increased 41%. The government suggested that this would create disincentive to work and lead to long term dependency on welfare system. According to a survey, 36.4% of respondents believed that “the increasing number of CSSA cases because the criteria for application is too lenient” (C.K. Wong, K. L. Chow & K.Y. Wong, 2001, p.5).

Although the way and method that government used to interpret and present the statistics had bias and hidden agenda, majority still believed that CSSA was breeding lazy people. Since CSSA has a strict income test and asset test, statistics of Suspected Fraud and Abuse was minimal. But the mass media created a negative image of CSSA recipients as they only reporting fraud and abusive cases. This, in turn, created a strong labeling effect on CSSA recipients. In a survey, 40.8% of respondents agreed that “CSSA recipients are not deserved to be help” (C.K. Wong, K. L. Chow & K.Y. Wong, 2001, p.9). This reflected the fact that CSSA recipients were stigmatized.

Apart from stigmatization of CSSA recipients, the role of welfare that interpreted by the public is also worth to discuss. Compare with giving direct welfare, people considered that self-reliance would be more appropriate. In a survey, 70.3% of respondents believed that “people should satisfy their needs through self-reliance”. On the other hand, only 8.6% respondents believed that “people should satisfy their needs through social welfare” (C.K. Wong, K. L. Chow & K.Y. Wong, 2001, p.30). The development of the concept “self-reliance” could be explained by the Utilitarianistic Familism. Utilitarianistic Familism is social values of the Chinese people in Hong Kong (Lau, 1982). Chinese people would put the interest of family member in a higher priority over others. The bonding of the family members was strong. In addition to the extended family structure in the early mid 20th century, people would not look for help from government; rather, they would look for help from family members. As most problems could be solved without the help of government, it contributed to the development a sense of “self-reliance”. This concept is particularly prevailing value hold by the older generation (i.e. Those who born in the Post War Baby Boom).

From the above discussion, we can see two sets of contradictory social values of welfare have developed in Hong Kong. On one hand, more people consider social welfare as their civil rights. On the other hand, people stigmatize some welfare recipients. It makes the rights of accessing welfare become alienated from the civil rights. These two contradictory values lead to different conflicts in society. Social workers, pressure groups and non-government organizations are striving for destigmatization of the welfare recipients. Lots of social actions like social demonstration and public forum are used to promote this civil rights. But at the same time, the government is attempting to marginalize the welfare recipients in order to reduce the welfare expenditure. From time to time, the government would publish the fraud and abusive case in CSSA. It seems that it wants to remind people that “abusive cases are still common in welfare system”. These, in turn, led to never-ending debates between the two interest groups.

As seen in above discussion, it is hard to find a consensus towards the value of welfare in Hong Kong. The historical background, personal experiences and education would have a strong influence on the development of our value. But it seems that government would spread concepts and ideas that deviated from the principles of social welfare – equality and equity, because it’s political agenda. Whether the ultimate goal of government is bring a stable and harmonious society in Hong Kong is questionable.

“It’ll be okay,” Blake said to himself, “It’s 2010, nobody will have a problem with it.” As he walked through the doors of his high school, there was a sense of belonging and that truly everything would be okay. Halfway through the day, Blake had already met a handful of nice people and decided to sit with them at lunch–this is when things took a turn for the worst. Towards the end of lunch, he told one of his new friends he was gay. Instantly, his new friends face went stark with disgust. Shortly after a group of football players walked towards the table they were sitting at and began harassing Blake until the bell rang. This is the world that gay and lesbian youth are being exposed to on an almost daily basis.

There are more homosexual people in the United States than there are Asians; with those estimates you would believe that there would be more acceptance and understanding amongst society towards homosexuals. The only way to combat these vicious attacks on GLBT youth is to educate their peers as well as counselors and teachers. Given that more and more adolescents who are gay or lesbian are now “coming out” and identifying their sexual orientation, disregarding that American society continues to exhibit bias and even hostility toward gays and lesbians, counselors working with this population must take a proactive role in providing much needed support (Callahan, 2001). Gay and lesbian youth, according to Callahan (2001), are at greater risk for school failure and suicide. They are often harassed and need counselors who will understand while working with them without passing judgment. Court cases demonstrate the liability of schools that fail to protect gay and lesbian students from harassment.

Counselors, because of their position as student advocates, must take the lead role in identifying any and all incidents of violence, abuse, or harassment directed toward gay and lesbian students. Counselors must also help to sensitize faculty and staff to issues impacting upon gay and lesbian students while simultaneously educating heterosexual students as well. Counselors are key actors in identifying the type of resources and curricular materials that should be included in school programs to help reduce homophobia, discrimination, bias and prejudice directed at gay and lesbian students. Garbo (2001) reported on the results of a Massachusetts Department of Health study which revealed that gay and lesbian high school students, compared to their heterosexual classmates, were four times as likely to attempt suicide. In a survey of 4,000 high school students in Massachusetts, the investigators found that lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth are not predisposed to suicide and are no more mentally unstable than other students. However, because students in this minority population tend to be susceptible to all types of victimization by their peers, suicidal ideation and attempts may be more commonplace than is the norm among adolescents.

Anti-gay politicians and parents do not see a benefit of adequately creating informative programs for school officials dealing with homosexuality. They believe acknowledging homosexuality in such a way would further send the message that being gay or lesbian is okay. In their eyes, homosexuality is a choice and should not be accepted amongst society as a “social norm”. Conservative State Rep. Sally Kern was quoted saying at a Republican organization, “studies show no society that has totally embraced homosexuality has lasted more than a few decades.” This coincides with the logic that teaching in schools that homosexuality is okay at an early age will destroy our society from within itself. When looked through their perspective, without delving research it would seem that acknowledging homosexuals in the sense of legal rights and protection would promote more people to be homosexual. But that is not the case.

During my interview with a Graduate social worker, he shed light on what is currently being implemented into schools and his thoughts on how things should be handled. He currently provides therapy services at schools in rural communities and volunteers at his local LGBT organization:

This is my interview with Mr. Johnson,

Myself: “What is your viewpoint on harassment against homosexuality? Do you think that it is a notable issue worth spending time and money on?”

Mr. Johnson: “My view on harassment on homosexuality… well, it’s not just harassment against homosexuality. It’s against even perceived characteristics of a sexual minority… anything that varies from the most stereotypical gender norms.”

Mr. Johnson:”‘Gay’ and ‘faggot’ have become terms that get thrown around now in judgment of any less manly qualities.”

Mr. Johnson: “So is it a notable issue worth spending time on? I say yes. Time and money. Both by way of having competent training for teachers and administration, competent counseling staff, and local community-based resources for LGBT youth to have social and emotional support.”

Myself: “At what age do you feel it important to implement these strategies?”

Mr. Johnson: “I volunteer with a local LGBT center and they have started to implement training in some of the local schools as early as Kindergarten, however there’s been a lot of controversy with this training as they don’t specifically talk about LGBT issues or terms (its focused on empathy skills). Developmentally, their sexual development isn’t quite present enough to be effective at Kindergarten. Perhaps by 5th grade, concurrent with when some schools implement initial classes in sex ed., there should be general implementation of targeted curriculum on issues related to sexuality and gender identity.”

Myself: “What are your feelings on persons who believe that informing youth of homosexuality or letting it become social norm will inevitably lead to more homosexuals?”

Mr. Johnson: “Ha. This is hard. The issue is so engrained in the socio-political context that we have surrounding legislation, public education, and the supposed separation of church and state. I can get tied up in jargon all I want to, but sticking our tongues out and saying the opposite doesn’t further the process.”

Mr. Johnson: “I would go to the studies that demonstrate the development of sexuality and parenting (that obviously many homosexuals come from “straight” parents devoid of homosexual influence), studies regarding increased rates of depression, marital issues, and divorce for males who come out later in life….”

Myself: ” Do you think federal government should be involved in these improvements or local?”

Mr. Johnson: “It’s my perspective that the multiple levels of government must work to protect students. Looking at the SNDA (Student Non Discrimination Act) which currently does not protect LGBT students in their protected classes… is a clear sign that the values of the country are not inherently separate from the religious values of the majority. What argument against homosexuality is there if not based on religious beliefs. That said, there should be no opposition to the SNDA expanding to include issues of gender and sexual orientation in its protection.”

After the interview concluded, I walked away with more knowledge than I would have expected to learn on the subject. Several studies in the literature focus on counselors’ responsibilities with respect to gay and lesbian high school students. Callahan (2001), for example, recommends that a key action which must be taken by school counselors is to curb any harassment directed against gay and lesbian students. Strategies for doing this include; using inclusive language, challenging anti-gay slurs, designating persons who would be supportive of this population, making resources available and visible, educating staff members, making appropriate referrals, and referring parents of gay and lesbian students to organizations like Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG). Callahan (2001), along with Stone (2003), assert that the role of the counselor with gay and lesbian students is of enormous significance. This would make sense being that children always need an adult to look up to or relate to during their adolescent years. Also noting that counselors must be educated about homosexuality to the Nth degree. Callahan (2001) claims that counselors must function as advocates who work on school curricula. Including information about gay and lesbian people to promote awareness is essential. This helps to provide gay and lesbian students with role models and to demonstrate to the mainstream population that gays and lesbians lead viable and productive lives. Counselors must support and protect sexual minority youth by making it safe for gay and lesbian students, promoting policies that protect this minority population, and develop the culturally sensitive skills needed to serve gay and lesbian students in the counseling relationship.

Legal support for advocacy on behalf of gay, lesbian, and bisexual students was mandated in a May 1999 Supreme Court ruling. This ruling, coupled with recent interpretations of the Title IX statute, strengthens the position for a more humanistic school environment. School counselors both can and should take a lead role in facilitating such an environment. The Arlington Gay and Lesbian Alliance (2003), a Virginia-based advocacy group working with local public schools, strongly recommends that school counselors should be provided with additional training and education so they can become more effective in working with students from sexual minority groups. This is also the position taken by Pearson (2003) who calls for targeted seminars and courses for graduate level counseling students who intend to have careers in the public school system. In Massachusetts, the Department of Education has created a Safe Schools Program which addresses issues relevant to the safety and counseling needs of gay and lesbian students (Research notes, 2003). Counselors in this program take a lead role in developing school and district-wide programs to educate faculty and students and to provide for those policies and programs that support gay and lesbian students while creating safe school environments.

Homosexuality is a romantic or sexual attraction or behavior among members of the same sex. It refers to an enduring patterns of or disposition to experience sexual, affection, or romantic attractions primarily to people of the same sex. It is an individual’s sense of personal and social identity based on those attractions, behaviors expressing them, and membership in a community of those who share them.

Homosexuality nowadays, leads to Same-Sex Marriage, according to Oxford English Dictionary; it is a legally or socially recognized marriage between two persons of the same biological sex or social gender. It is in which other country like Netherlands is in favor of Same-Sex Marriage; while other country, particularly the Philippines does not agree or even implement the Same-Sex Marriage.

Since that the Philippines is the only Catholic country and Christian dominan country in Asia and it is 3rd in the world, we Filipinos live in a family-oriendted family. Hence, we are raised up with different values which include the Moral Values we obtain from the teachings of the Bible; the sacred book of Christianity.

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. (Leviticus 20:13)

There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel. Thou shalt not bring the hire of a whore, or the price of a dog, into the house of the LORD thy God for any vow: for even both these are abominations unto the LORD thy God. (Deuteronomy 23:17-18)

As years pass by, there are a lot of incidents which pertains to the Same-Sex Marriage. And as a growing community, authority speaks out and commented on the issue. Pope Benedict XVI gave his comment regarding the issue. He merely opposed to gay/lesbian marriage concerning about the environment, suggesting the law determining “the differences between the sexes” were threats to creation. Comments were made by the Pope addressing it to the Diplomats with the main theme of “The Environment and the protection of Creation,” whereas;

To carry our reflection further, we must remember that the problem of the environment is complex; one might compare it to a multifaceted prism.

Creature differs from one another and can be protected, endangered, in different ways, as we know from daily experience. One such attacks comes from laws or proposals which, in the name of fighting discrimination, strike at the biological basis of the differences between the sexes,”

Yet, freedom cannot be absolute, since man is not GOD, GOD’S CREATION. For man, the path to be taken cannot be determined by caprice or willfulness, but must rather correspond to the structure willed by the creator. (qtd in. Gay Marriage threat to Creation)

In lieu with this, Pope Benedict XVI, disagree in Same-Sex Marriage. Our body is sacred and its sacredness leads to the respect of each and every one of us.

It is indeed that each and every one of us has our own side on the issue – Same-Sex Marriage. Each religious group that is existing right now has their own stand regarding the issue.

Islamic law explicitly denounces homosexuality and the practice of homosexuality is a crime in many Islamic countries, including Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Although the Presbyterian Church’s governing body has not explicitly addressed the issue of gay marriage, the church issued a ruling in 1997 prohibiting the ordination of homosexuals. Regional bodies and clergy, however, have challenged this ruling, causing a major rift among Presbyterians.

Although the Episcopal Church has not explicitly established a position in favor of gay marriage, in 2006 the church stated its “support of gay and lesbian persons and [opposition to] any state or federal constitutional amendment” prohibiting gay marriages or civil unions. Furthermore, in 2009, the church’s national convention voted to give bishops the option to bless same-sex unions.

While the Reform and Reconstructionist Jewish movements are ardent supporters of gay and lesbian rights, including the right of same-sex couples to wed, they do not require rabbis to officiate at the weddings of gay couples. The Conservative movement, which does not sanctify gay marriage, grants autonomy to individual rabbis to choose whether or not to recognize same-sex unions. The leadership of Orthodox Judaism has defined marriage as an institution between a man and a woman and therefore does not accept same-sex marriage.

The essence of having a happy and healthy life is having a family. Family, in a sense that love and caring is within its family members. “Sexual interactions between same sexes are not capable of having a family”. Indeed, it is a very factual line that each of us agree.

Same-Sex Marriage as a matter of fact is not socially accepted here in the Philippines. These may lead to the discrimination of the homosexuals, bisexuals, transgender and others who belong to the third sex.

According to House Bill 1245, authored by Rep. Rozzano Rufino “Ruffy” Biazon, it is the amendment of the country’s Family Code to limit the marriage to natural born males and females only. Regards to this House Bill is the Total Ban of Same-Sex Marriage here in our country.

On the other hand, Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago filed Senate Bill No. 1276 which aims to bar the Same-Sex Marriages celebrated abroad from getting legal recognition here in the Philippines. This Bill seeks to correct the Family Code, which does not explicitly void Same-Sex Marriage which was solemnized abroad. “Marriage is a Union founded on the distinction of sex.” (qtd. in Bill 1276)

As a Senate counterpart of House Bill 1245, Sen. Rodolfo Biazon filed Senate Bill No. 1575. A reaction to a number of rulings made by local courts which allow every citizen who are transsexuals to change their status from male to female. “with recent developments in the field of medicine, it is now possible to allow or to change a person’s sex organ to make it appear as that of the opposite sex.” In this Bill, it prohibits marriage between two men or two women, whom one of it had a sex organ exchange in which the Vatican disagree. (“House” 1245)

These Bills are all pending cases in the House Committee on Youth, Women and Family Relations. In which these Bills were merely discussed, evaluated and argued by the respectable Representatives and Senators of the Republic of the Philippines.

Issues are made due to Same-Sex Marriage which leads to the societal problems and misunderstandings. We respect every human being in this world.

Due to issues which damage the image of third sexes, many organizations and governing bodies were born, in order to protect the Civil Rights of each Third Sex. Each organization has its goal to end the discrimination and the criminalization towards the Third sexes. Laws protecting the Homosexuals were made and implemented. But there are only states who are merely implementing these laws.

Gay Rights Movement, an organization organized in America, which efforts were made in order for the Homosexuals to be treated equally among others. It aims that each Homosexuals must be respected and must not experience Discrimination from others. (“Gay” 95)

Many non profits, non partisan networks of the third sexes boomed here in the Philippines. These are Organizations and Individuals who are working towards achieving a society free from all forms of Discrimination, particularly those who are based on gender or sexual orientation.

Lesbian and Gay Legislative Advocacy Network-Philippines was formally launched in 1999. Its purpose is to advance and protect the Human Rights and fundamental freedoms of each Filipino who belongs to the Third Sex, especially in the area of Politics and Legislations.

Its advocacy is to push for laws that will promote the Third Sex Rights and Welfare. Indeed, campaigns were made to influence publics discourse on Sexuality and to raise the influence awareness of every Filipino regarding the situation of Lesbians and Gays.

Another organization here in the Philippines is the LADLAd, a network of Lesbian, Gays, Bisexuals, and transgender Filipinos. An organization formed last September 1, 2003. “Magladlad” means to unfurl the cape that used to cover one’s body as a shield. It simply means that each and every one of us who are experiencing something different relating to gender, must come out of the closet and reveals what’s inside and to standout with dignity. And as a result, you will find yourself to be free and respectable.

Ladlad run for a Party-list for Congress last elections and they bound to make History as the first ever political party which composed of different Filipino’s from the Third Sex that will claim and reclaim the rights that the Third Sexes lost from years of homophobia and Discrimination. They aims to be the organization which will provide comfort to the Third Sex. And a “sandigan” of the needy homosexuals who are abused, simply because of belonging to the third Sex. Ladlad also aims the following platforms, whereas;

Support for the Anti-Discrimination Bill that gives LGBT Filipinos equal opportunities in employment and equal treatment in schools, hospitals, restaurants, hotels, entertainment centers, and government offices.

Re-filing of the bill to repeal the Anti-Vagrancy Law that some unscrupulous policemen use to extort bribes from gay men without ID cards;

Setting up of micro-finance and livelihood projects for poor and handicapped LGBT Filipinos;

Setting up of centers for Golden Gays, or old and abandoned LGBTs, as well as young ones driven out of their homes. The centers will also offer legal aid and counseling, as well as information about LGBT issues, HIV-AIDS, and reproductive health. These centers will be set up initially in the key cities/metropolitan areas of the Philippines — Baguio, National Capital Region, Cebu and Davao. (“Ladlad” 101)

They differ in names, but they have their same goals and achievements. Campaigning in prohibiting the Discrimination of the Third Sexes.

Due to the issues and governing bodies which support Third Sex, effect cannot be vanished from this kind of scenarios. Each event that took place have effects. It may be Positive or Negative effects that can change or affects us, in a manner that we are concern in what’s the real score between the issue- Same-Sex Marriage.

According to Dr. Ambert, Same-Sex Marriage has possible positive and negative effect to children. She also stressed that through the vivid image that children saw in their Environment, really affects them in a good and bad manner. It is not whether children should be raised by same-sex parents, it is whether same-sex parents should be allowed to marry , or they ,must simply lived together-perhaps-with children under a status less than marriage, with reduced recognition and support by the state. (Same 97)

Children would benefit led by a family composing of Same-Sex Marriage.

“Without question, civil marriage enhances the ‘welfare of the community.’ It is a ‘social institution of the highest importance.’ French v. McAnarney, supra. Civil marriage anchors an ordered society by encouraging stable relationships over transient ones. It is central to the way the Commonwealth identifies individuals, provides for the orderly distribution of property, ensures that children and adults are cared for and supported whenever possible from private rather than public funds, and tracks important epidemiological and demographic data…..Where a married couple has children, their children are also directly or indirectly, but no less auspiciously, the recipients of the special legal and economic protections obtained by civil marriage…..marital children reap a measure of family stability and economic security based on their parents’ legally privileged status that is largely inaccessible, or not as readily accessible, to non-marital children. Some of these benefits are social, such as the enhanced approval that still attends the status of being a marital child. Others are material, such as the greater ease of access to family-based State and Federal benefits that attend the presumptions of one’s parentage.” (qtd. In More on the Hawaii Same-Sex Civil Marriage Case.)

Some would argue that when a state allows SSM, the public will gradually become more accepting of homosexual orientation and behavior. They will agree with professional mental health associations and recognize it as a normal, natural, unchosen and unchangeable sexual orientation for a minority of adults. This will reduce levels of discrimination, hatred, and oppression against gays and lesbians, and reduce the levels of ridicule that their children receive from fellow students.

Dr. Ambert comments that: “Lesbigays who have children often create a network of fictive kin or ‘chosen’ family (friends, former partners, and willing relatives) for social and emotional support as well as to offer their children suitable adult role models of the other sex. This support network may be entirely gay but generally represents a mixture.” This arrangement gives children many additional role models in their life, that children in families led by opposite-sex couples may not have. (“Same” 97)

Many religious and social conservatives disagree completely with professional mental health organizations and believe that homosexuality is abnormal, unnatural, chosen and changeable. Most disapprove of equal rights for gays and lesbians, including the right to marry the individual that they love. Many believe that homosexual behavior is hated by God. If these beliefs are true, then one might argue:

1. Children raised in families led by same-sex parents would be continually exposed to homosexuality. They may choose to become gay or lesbian at a higher rate than those raised by a father and mother.

2. Men and women have very different personalities, brain structure, talents, etc. They are designed to fit into very different roles within the family. In order for children to be properly socialized, they need to be brought up by both a father and a mother. The long range effects on children who are brought up by two women or two men are unknown and can only be speculated upon.

3. God may punish same-sex parents. This might adversely affect the children in their family.

4. God may also punish the nation as a whole if SSM is legalized. That would harm all children in the nation.

5. Children of same-sex couples will be exposed to a great deal of ridicule and hatred by their fellow students. This could negatively affect their development. (Same 99)

Issues concerning health has an effect on Same-Sex Marriage.

Sexually transmitted diseases (also known as STDs – or STIs for “sexually transmitted infections”) are infectious diseases that spread from person to person through intimate contact. STDs can affect guys and girls of all ages and backgrounds who are having sex – it doesn’t matter if they’re rich or poor. ()

Unfortunately, STDs have become common among teens and also sex by the same-sex. Because same gender which is having sex is more at risk for getting some STDs, it’s important to learn what you can do to protect yourself.

STDs are more than just an embarrassment. They’re a serious health problem. If untreated, some STDs can cause permanent damage, such as infertility (the inability to have a baby) and even death (in the case of HIV/AIDS).

Some of the things that increase a person’s chances of getting an STD are:

Sexual activity at a young age. The younger a person starts having sex, the greater his or her chances of becoming infected with an STD.

Lots of sex partners. People who have sexual contact – not just I I ntercourse, but any form of intimate activity – with many different partners are more at risk than those who stay with the same partner.

Unprotected sex. Latex condoms are the only form of birth control that reduce your risk of getting an STD. Spermicides, diaphragms, and other birth control methods may help prevent pregnancy, but they don’t protect a person against STDs

AIDS is one of the most serious, deadly diseases in Human history. More than 20 years ago, doctors in the United States identified the first cases of AIDS in San Francisco and New York. Now there are an estimated 42 million people living with HIV or AIDS worldwide, and more than 3 million die every year from AIDS-related illnesses.

According to Oxford dictionary, AIDS is caused by the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). HIV destroys a type of defense cell in the body called a CD4 helper lymphocyte (pronounced: lim-fuh-site). These lymphocytes are part of the body’s immune system, the defense system that fights infectious diseases. But as HIV destroys these lymphocytes, people with the virus begin to get serious infections that they normally wouldn’t – that is, they become immune deficient. The name for this condition is acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS).

As the medical community learns more about how HIV works, they’ve been able to develop drugs to inhibit it (meaning they interfere with its growth). These drugs have been successful in slowing the progress of the disease, and people with the disease now live much longer. But there is still no cure for HIV and AIDS.

Hundreds of same-sex who are engaged in sex become infected with HIV each year. HIV can be transmitted from an infected person to another person through blood, semen (also known as “cum,” the fluid released from the penis when a male ejaculates), vaginal fluids, and breast milk.

The virus is spread through high-risk behaviors including:

– unprotected oral, vaginal, or anal sexual intercourse (“unprotected” means not using a condom)

– sharing needles, such as needles used to inject drugs (including needles used for injecting steroids) and those used for tattooing. (“AIDS” 25)

We have a great part on this issue, as well as it has a big impact to us, not only to us, but also, to the society. As a student, I am disagreeing at Same-Sex Marriage. It’s just simply because that my principle for this situation is that “god created only men and women” nevertheless, third sex is written in the bible. And having sex with the same gender is a big sin. And as for my contribution, I am one of the few people who respect their lifestyle, because we are all created equally in the image and likeness of God. And I do believe that we are all part of a big and happy family.

Introduction

Refers to the sexual attraction to the persons of the same sex.it comes from two words homs-means same and sex-refes to the sex orientation.its a behavior which develops du to the environmental factors or its either through genetic inheritance.additionally,the trait can be as a result of sexul mutilation of child .r either due to lack of good connections between the same sex parents with their children.due to this some feelings of the child go unmet,the feelings don’t disappear but they rather develop intense and strange behavior twards the persons of the same sex hence the element of homosexuality sprouts in the society.

Sociological analysis on homosexuality.

Some people in the society believe homosexuality to be an illness and s that it could be rectified .but most of of the processes of round the revolve psychological therapies which expects to change homosexual sexuality to heterosexual. ), the world’s largest association of psychologists American Psychological Association (APA), stated 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 sexual orientation.”

But the strongly religion believes that homosexuality is a sinful act which is against the bible and is and has a direct breach of the bible and other religious books.

moreover,some two founders of a ministry put to finish homosexuals later described their programme as ‘ineffective since not even one person was changed.

The issue of eradicating homosexuality has became a political debate in America, with Christian political organisations supporting the slogan of changing homosexuality through force of will alone. They argue that many people are leaving their homosexual lifestyles due to sexual celibacy and marriage issues.

Optionally, homosexual rights organisations argue that the views about gays and lesbians views misunderstand the meaning of a gay,and this sprouts to discrimination against the gay and lesbian people. additionally, the American Psychological Association(APA) has carried out a systematic research, which have resulted to that the psychological strategies are neither effective nor do they at any time change the sexual orientation, however instead they can cause a considerable harm.

The views of the society on homosexuality

The research shows that the views concerning homosexuality are specifically very delicate.in the society it depends on the culture and religios backgrounds.it is viewed that diffent people view the issue differently according to the cultural values of their society.gays and lesbians have civil rights which support their acts.however the religion does not agree wioth the acts since it views it as a sin and against the laws of the bible and any other holy book.but in the recent past individuals have tried to negotiate religion inorder for them to be accomondated in the society.

On the assumption that “homosexuality” is genetically conditioned, some people conclude that it is wrong to call it sinful. This is a false deduction, and for significant reasons. First of all, being wrongly worded, it throws the discussion off course. The canons and Fathers of the Church deal with specific acts and deeds and not with such abstract terms as “homosexuality.” The question could be better worded: If a homosexual inclination is genetic, how can a person be accused of sin for engaging in homosexual acts? This is better wording, but the premise is still wrong.

Though a large sexual appetite might be influenced by our genetic make-up, this does not mean that for people with such an appetite committing fornication or adultery is not sinful. Similarly with all the other sins. Something in people’s genetic make-up might incline them to a violent disposition – this does not mean that a so inclined is not sinning when he treats people with violence or commits murder.

Generally,homosexual is considered as a Deviance and behavior that does not conform to social norms, therefore is socially created. Since most people in the United States believe that homosexuality is wrong, society has created homosexuality to be a deviance. Since deviance is relative and not absolute to a society, homosexuality is not a universal form of sexual deviance. There are many cultures that accept forms of homosexuality. The Western society is not accepting of it though, and many times this non-accepting view cause discrimination towards homosexuals but Is homosexuality is a way for some people in the society.

The Church also extends an open invitation to those who suffer from the passion of homosexuality. Admittedly, the Church could certainly do a better job with this group that exists within her flock, as well as reach out and embrace them as people, with as much compassion as when dealing with other people who suffer from other sexual passions. The Church still considers these sexual behaviors as passions even in the light of recent scientific research that points to homosexuality in particular having a genetic origin as well. A study by “Camperio-Ciani estimates at this time 20% of the varianc

Problems of homosexual

the moral, religious and legal attitudes in trials to curb sexual behavior have interfeared with a clear view of the medical and psychological aspects of homosexuality. This phenomenon is probably much less destructive of social aspects of our society and culture than is generally believed, since it is actually more widespread than is generally acknowledged.( Norman Reider, pp 381-384)

Homosexuality usually has hormonal,social and psychological factors,where the latter of which are the only ones which can be worked with successfully in our present state . A general practitioner’s task is to aid those who wish and need help with this problem in finding psychiatric treatment in the same way that persons with any other emotional disturbance are referred. This should be carried out without bias just as with any other emotional disturbance.( Norman Reider pp 381-384)

Increase in the divorce cases due to increased engagement in the among gays and lesbian marriage hence reduced number of heterosexual marriages.also there is a significant number of unmarrid men and women in the society.

Also Homosexuals do not reproduce and thus threaten the survival of society-the act of homosexuality does not lead to the good act of having children and, for that reason, is harmful.

The recent studies and researches show that the homosexuals have a greater chance of getting psychiatric problems than the heterosexual.such problems are accompanied by some instances such as high rates of suicide,depressin and antisocial personality disorders also use of drugs or substance abuse.( By N.E. Whitehead, Ph.D. Author of “My Genes Me Do It”)

Homosexuals pose a threat to children-I have known few homosexuals who did not practice their tendencies. Such people are sinning against God and will lead to the ultimate destruction of the family and our nation. I am unalterably opposed to such things, and will do everything I can to restrict the freedom of these people to spread their contagious infection to the youth of our nation.” ( Pat Robertson, May 24, 1994 letter)

Homosexuality is a depressing and sad lifestyle-As we can see, one argument easily leads to another: the high incidence of suicide among gay teenagers could also be used as an argument against homosexuality, along with other problems, such as discrimination or violence. But let us first ponder upon why gay teens feel depressed to a large degree.

Homosexuality causes AIDS and other sexually transimited diseases which are and deadly-hence it does not argue whether homosexuality immensely affects the society or not because homosexuals since AIDS more than heterosexuals; this is due to the fact that the same sex are mo prone to such diseases. infact, it is more fruitful to analyze the type of trait that are conducive to HIV infection, and such are shown by the gays

Homosexuals want special political rights.-Different homosexuals want different things in the real life of politics.but there should be equality under the law and this means that no special treatment or a favour is granted to one group of people then it must be also extended to to the other group of people in the society.the most important areas specifically concerning homosexuality is, marriage laws and government discrimination.

Homosexuality undermines religion and hence stability in the society-This argument is problematic on several counts. Firstly, many of people think it highly beneficial if religion is undermined and we furthermore think it incorrect to equate the spread of religion with “stability” (whatever that is; probably, the definition is tautological, such that stability is defined as following some religion). As is clear from several essays on morality on my atheism page, it is quite possible to have a well-functioning society with caring individuals without any religion at all.

Homosexual behavior is also linked with higher rates of promiscuity, physical disease, mental illness, substance abuse, child sexual abuse and domestic violence–all things that impact society negatively. Don’t try to say homosexual behavior doesn’t hurt society–it is a major force that tears down society and harms children.

Causes of homosexuality

The causes of homosexuality in the modern society maybe due to:genetics inheritance where t where,he baby is born with the gene of homosexuality u in him/her especially from the X-gene from the mother mostly.hormonal imbalance

.during birth-.here the boy is born with features that are someh common with the homosexuals than in the population. such traits might be inherited (genetic), while others might have been caused by the change in the hormones Jeffrey suggests that someone without these traits will be somewhat less likely to become homosexual later than someone with the( Jeffrey Satinover,M.D. )

environmental factors.

This comes on various developmental growth needs children kids have, needs for friendship with the same-sex parent and same-sex peers.its through this that we understand that thechildren are not simply born with a sense of their own gender buit is formed through the connections and friendships they form with the others, mostly the age bracket of the same sex.the children always look upon their same-sex parent first and then to same-sex peers to form their own identity:inorder to understand how theysuit in,the value the own as male or female.if this connection lacks then children don’t form a healthy same sex bond and such needs for same sex go unsatisfied then they intensify and take another form. (Satinover, 1996).

The developmental factors combined with genetic temperament, impacts perceptions, which all go to the development of homosexuality.

sexual abuse(molestation) or traumatic experiences.they contribute to the development of same-sex affection(attractions). personal choice,prenatal hormone defect,lack of bondage between the child and the same sex parent, .reincarnation

.”
Is homosexual judged harshly?

Yes,homosexuals are treated with hostility in the societyaˆ¦the reasons to show this discrimination are given below:-

1)It is said that gays are not natural. And real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.

2)The society things that gay marriage encourage people to be gays since the behaviuor of people affect others,

3) It is ctritisiced that encouraging gays to marry will lead open all kinds of crazy behaviors. And even people may even decide to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.

4) Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn’t changed at all like many of the principles on which this great country was founded; women are still property, blacks still can’t marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.

5) Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of marriages like Britney Spears’ 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.

6) Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn’t be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren’t full yet, and the world needs more children.

7)its also assumed that obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.

8)religion do not support marriage of gays . since in many countries the cultures and religions do not sccept such even in the country.

9)Its also criticized that children cannot succeed without the role models of the both sexes. Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That’s why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.

10) Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven’t adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans

The church which is expected to act as the guide to the society about the issue of homosexuality provides the guidelines for such other than the society being so harsh to the people with such minor traits.The church gives the guide lines on the issue-

· The church says that homosexuality is supposed to be seen as the result of humanity’s rebellion against God, against his own nature and well-being and it is not to be taken as a way of living and acting for men and women made in God’s image and likeness.

· It also says that the people with homosexual tendencies are supposed to seek assistance in discovering the specific causes of their homosexual orientation, and to work toward overcoming its harmful effects in their lives.

· Persons struggling with homosexuality who accept the Orthodox faith and strive to fulfill the Orthodox way of life may be communicants of the Church with everyone else who believes and struggles. Those instructed and counseled in Orthodox Christian doctrine and ascetical life who still want to justify their behavior may not participate in the Church’s sacramental mysteries, since to do so would not help, but harm them.

· Assistance is to be given to those who deal with persons of homosexual orientation in order to help them with their thoughts, feelings and actions with regard to homosexuality. Such assistance is especially necessary for parents, relatives and friends of persons with homosexual tendencies and feelings. It is certainly necessary for pastors and church workers.

These affirmations on marriage, family, sexuality, and the sanctity of life are issued by the Holy Synod of Bishops on the occasion of the Tenth All-American Council of the Orthodox Church in America (Miami, Florida, July, 1992)

Conclusion.

As in every moral disorder, homosexual activity prevents one’s own fulfillment and happiness by acting contrary to the creative wisdom of God and the moral values in the society. The Church, and the society in rejecting erroneous opinions regarding homosexuality, does not limit but rather defends personal freedom and dignity realistically and authentically understood.

Introduction

Refers to the sexual attraction to the persons of the same sex.it comes from two words homs-means same and sex-refes to the sex orientation.its a behavior which develops du to the environmental factors or its either through genetic inheritance.additionally,the trait can be as a result of sexul mutilation of child .r either due to lack of good connections between the same sex parents with their children.due to this some feelings of the child go unmet,the feelings don’t disappear but they rather develop intense and strange behavior twards the persons of the same sex hence the element of homosexuality sprouts in the society.

Sociological analysis on homosexuality

Some people in the society believe homosexuality to be an illness and s that it could be rectified .but most of of the processes of round the revolve psychological therapies which expects to change homosexual sexuality to heterosexual. ), the world’s largest association of psychologists American Psychological Association (APA), stated 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 sexual orientation.”

But the strongly religion believes that homosexuality is a sinful act which is against the bible and is and has a direct breach of the bible and other religious books.

moreover,some two founders of a ministry put to finish homosexuals later described their programme as ‘ineffective since not even one person was changed.

The issue of eradicating homosexuality has became a political debate in America, with Christian political organisations supporting the slogan of changing homosexuality through force of will alone. They argue that many people are leaving their homosexual lifestyles due to sexual celibacy and marriage issues.

Optionally, homosexual rights organisations argue that the views about gays and lesbians views misunderstand the meaning of a gay,and this sprouts to discrimination against the gay and lesbian people. additionally, the American Psychological Association(APA) has carried out a systematic research, which have resulted to that the psychological strategies are neither effective nor do they at any time change the sexual orientation, however instead they can cause a considerable harm.

The views of the society on homosexuality

The research shows that the views concerning homosexuality are specifically very delicate.in the society it depends on the culture and religios backgrounds.it is viewed that diffent people view the issue differently according to the cultural values of their society.gays and lesbians have civil rights which support their acts.however the religion does not agree wioth the acts since it views it as a sin and against the laws of the bible and any other holy book.but in the recent past individuals have tried to negotiate religion inorder for them to be accomondated in the society.

Due to the fact that homosexuality is genetically inherited then some persons thing its bad to call the action sinful.because this is untrue conclusion, and for important reasons. Firstly, being wrongly prounounced, it stems up the the debate off course. The founders and staters of the Church deal with certain acts and doings but though not with such wrong terms as “homosexuality.” The question that rises in this is if homosexual traits are genetic, then how logical is to accuse such person of engaging in a sinful actions of homosexuality?.The issue that arises here are that homosexuality should be given a better wording despite the fact that the action is considered wrong.

Despite the fact that largen sexual performance may be due to the genetic composition of our bodies this do not gurantee that such persons with such large sexual needs committing fornication is not sinfil but the fact remains that such actions are sinful before the holy book of God and its something to be shunnerd in the society and such acts are just like any other sin commitrted by a Christian. Sometimes the people’s genetic composition might make/lead them to violent disposition and this is sinning meaning that inclining is sinning just like when such a person commits murder or treats people with violence in the society

Generally,homosexual is considered as a deviance and behavior that do not comply with the social norms and values of the society, hence therefore is socially created. Since many persons in the United States society believes that homosexuality is wrongful, society has made and highlighted homosexuality to be a a moral wrong. Since moral wrong is relative and not absolute to a society.

Homosexuality is not a universal form of sexual immorality. There are most cultures that allow and support this forms of homosexuality. The Western society defy it though, and mostly this has lead to the non-accepting view resulting to discrimination towards homosexuals. But despite all this they should understand that homosexuality is a way of survival for some persons even if minority in the society and they should be accepted and accomondated the way they are and not isolating the in the society.

The Church also encourages those who endure from the feel and passion of homosexuality. Additionally, the Church can usually and surely do a admierable work with this minority group that exists within her flock, moreover it can also reach out and accomondate them since such people, have much compassion especially when dealing with peoples who suffer from different sexual passions. Mo More so the Church is still should considers such sexual behaviors as passions even in the presence of modern scientific research that shows how homosexuality in particular have a genetic origin also. (Camperio-Ciani ).

Problems of homosexual

the moral, religious and legal attitudes in trials to curb sexual behavior have interfeared with a clear view of the medical and psychological aspects of homosexuality. This phenomenon is probably much less destructive of social aspects of our society and culture than is generally believed, since it is actually more widespread than is generally acknowledged.( Norman Reider, pp 381-384)

Homosexuality usually has hormonal,social and psychological factors,where the latter of which are the only ones which can be worked with successfully in our present state . A general practitioner’s task is to aid those who wish and need help with this problem in finding psychiatric treatment in the same way that persons with any other emotional disturbance are referred. This should be carried out without bias just as with any other emotional disturbance.( Norman Reider pp 381-384).

Increase in the divorce cases due to increased engagement in the among gays and lesbian marriage hence reduced number of heterosexual marriages.also there is a significant number of unmarried men and women in the society.

Also Homosexuals are unproductive in character this poses a threat to the society’s survival -in the homosexual marriages the acts involved do not lead to production and this stems oup the issue of the society since this will lead to no tomorrows generation in the society hence therefore thi act is considered immoral in the society and harmful.

The recent studies and researches show that the homosexuals have a greater chance of getting psychiatric problems than the heterosexual.such problems are accompanied by some instances such as high rates of suicide,depressin and antisocial personality disorders also use of drugs or substance abuse.( By N.E. Whitehead, Ph.D. Author of “My Genes Me Do It”)

Homosexuals pose a threat to children-the presence of few homosexuals who do not exercise their normalities. These persons sin against the creator and there is no doubt that they are leading to total destruction of the both the family and our nation. I Pat opposed homosexuals and will do he said that he could do everything he could to restrict the freedom of these people to spread their contagious infection to the youth of our nation.( Pat Robertson, May 24, 1994 letter).

Homosexuality is a sad and disillusioning lifestyle-this lifestyle is full of stressfull moments hence things are always stressfull;homosexuality poses and brings about the increased incidences of suicide among gay teenagers,the issues of isolation ,discrimination and the cases of violences increase in the society

Homosexuality causes AIDS and other sexually transimited diseases which are and deadly-hence it does not argue whether homosexuality immensely affects the society or not because homosexuals since AIDS more than heterosexuals; this is due to the fact that the same sex are mo prone to such diseases. infact, it is successful to examine the kind of character s that are favourable to HIV infection, and such traits are shown and noticeable by and on the gays

Homosexuals needs unique political rights and systems.-Different homosexuals want various things in the real life of politics but there should be equality under the law implying that no special or unique or specific treatments or a favours should be performed to a certain unique group of persons alone but just incase such happens then the same should be granted to the othern persons in the same society.The most important areas specifically concerning homosexuality is, marriage laws and government discrimination.

Homosexuality undermines religion therefore leading to stability in the society-The argument stems up problems in some several areas in the society,such areas are such as: Firstly, many of people think its highly beneficial if religion is undermined and we furthermore think its not correct to compare the widespread of religion with “stability” (whatever that is; probably, the definition is tautological, such that stability is defined as following some religion). As is clear from several essays on morality on my atheism page, it is quite possible to have a well-functioning society with caring individuals without any religion at all.

Homosexual behavior is also linked with higher rates of promiscuity, physical disease, mental illness, substance abuse, child sexual abuse and domestic violence–all things that impact society negatively. Don’t try to say homosexual behavior doesn’t hurt society–it is a major force that tears down society and harms children.

Causes of homosexuality

The causes of homosexuality in the modern society maybe due to:genetics inheritance where t where,he baby is born with the gene of homosexuality u in him/her especially from the X-gene from the mother mostly.hormonal imbalance

During birth-.here the boy is born with features that are some common with the homosexuals than in the population. such traits might be inherited (genetic), while others might have been caused by the change in the hormones Jeffrey suggests that someone without these traits will be somewhat less likely to become homosexual later than someone with the( Jeffrey Satinover,M.D. )

Environmental factors.

This comes on various developmental growth needs children kids have, needs for friendship with the parent of the same sex and age-mates of the same sex.Its through this that we understand that the children are not simply born with a sense of their own gender built is formed through the connections and friendships they form with the others, mostly the age bracket of the same sex age-mates.the children always look upon the parent of the same sex first and then to same peers to form their own sexul groupings inorder to understand how they suit in,and the value they own whether male or female.If this connection lacks then children don’t form a healthy same sex bond and such needs for same sex go unsatisfied then they intensify and take another form. (Satinover, 1996).

The developmental factors combined with genetic temperament, impacts perceptions, which all go to the development of homosexuality.

Sexual abuse(molestation) or traumatic experiences.

They contribute to the development of same-sex affection(attractions). personal choice,prenatal hormone defect,lack of bondage between the child and the parent of the same sex.

Reincarnation

Is homosexual judged harshly?

Yes, homosexuals are treated with hostility in the societyaˆ¦the reasons to show this discrimination are given below:-

1) It is said that gays are not natural. And real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.

2) The society things that gay marriage encourage people to be gays since the behaviuor of people affect others,

3) It is ctritisiced that encouraging gays to marry will lead open all kinds of crazy behaviors. And even people may even decide to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.

4) Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn’t changed at all like many of the principles on which this great country was founded; women are still property, blacks still can’t marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.

5) Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of marriages like Britney Spears’ 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.

6) Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn’t be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren’t full yet, and the world needs more children.

7) It’s also assumed that obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.

8) Religion do not support marriage of gays . since in many countries the cultures and religions do not sccept such even in the country.

9) It’s also criticized that children cannot succeed without the role models of the both sexes. Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That’s why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.

10) Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven’t adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans

The church which is expected to act as the guide to the society about the issue of homosexuality provides the guidelines for such other than the society being so harsh to the people with such minor traits.The church gives the guide lines on the issue-

· The church says that homosexuality is supposed to be seen as the result of humanity’s rebellion against God, against his own nature and well-being and and its not supposed to be seen as a way of surviving and acting for men and women who are created in the likeness and the image of God’s.

· It also says that the people with homosexual tendencies are supposed to seek assistance in discovering the specific causes of their homosexual orientation, and to work toward overcoming its harmful effects in their lives.

· The church also provides that homesexual persons who accept the Orthodox faith and everyone else who believes and struggles,instructed and counseled in the Orthodox Christian doctrine and ascetical life hence therefore the persons still in need to justify their behavioral traits in the society may not be included and accomondated in the Church’s sacramental processes,this is due to the fact that the sct of doing so would not assist them but rather harm them.

· It also suggests that the psychiatrists who are involved and deal with persons with homosexual orientation should be given assistance inorder to help such peoples in their thoughts,actions and feelings with theb regard on the issue of homosexuality. Such assistance will be ideal especially if given to the necessary parents, relatives and friends of the affected individuals in the society.additionally, It is certainly necessary for pastors and church workers also to be given such assistance to be too involved in the rehabilitation of the same.

These affirmations on marriage, family, sexuality, and the sanctity of life are issued by the Holy Synod of Bishops on the occasion of the Tenth All-American Council of the Orthodox Church in America (Miami, Florida, July, 1992)

Conclusion.

Its evident that in all societal moral disorders,therefore it follows that homosexuality too leads to the prevention of one’s self fulfillment of goals and objectives and the joy experienced by acting and complying with the creativity and the enduring wisdom of the god the almighty and the moral values in the society.

The Church, and the society in complete objection of the different erroneous opinions on the issue concerning homosexuality, do not by any means reduce neither does it limit but rather defends and selfishly oppresses the personal freedom and dignity realistically and authentically understood.

Moreover the church is looked upto to regulate the societal moral values and the peoples behavior but at the same time it should leave a room for the minorities with contrary opinions in the society.

“Homeless People and Their Effects on the Society”

Introduction:

At the first glance of the image one automatically focuses on the homeless man sleeping on the sidewalk, the man’s bed is a bunch of old newspapers and all of his belongings lay beside him in an old knapsack, a girl is passing by him apparently without paying any heed to the man’s sorry state. The image is very powerful. The sole reason behind selecting this image is the factor that it speaks to the audience, although a very simple image without any color and not much is going on in it, yet it has quite a deep meaning attached to it as it very simply attempts to shed some light on the different living conditions of the members of a same species. The road where cars are passing by, and ironically a luxury sedan is parked next to where the man is sleeping, on the other side a girl is walking past the sleeping man. The man sleeps on the ground completely aloof from the world, but sadly the aloofness is mutual as no one apparently seems to care about the homeless man. This concept in psychology is termed as the ‘bystander effect. The term Bystander effect denotes the scenario where an individual is less likely to help another one in distress in the presence of others than when he is alone.

This is only one aspect of looking at the picture. There is more to it than meets the eye not only does this image very powerfully yet simply describe the bystander effect but it also brings to light the social problems such as the growing gap between social classes where the rich tend to get richer and the poor, well …poorer furthermore describing the decreasing compassion in the contemporary social system. The image looks very ordinary and without any violent or explicit imagery, the fact that it seems too ordinary to us is the fact that we take such things for granted and most of us would pass by a homeless man on the sidewalk without even noticing him. As we see others not helping him we automatically assume that this is not something important. An image of a girl walking by a homeless man sleeping on the sidewalk is a very powerful and an almost epistolary description, strongly contradicting the concept of social equality in the contemporary society. (Mario Luis Small, 2010)

Thesis Statement: The analysis shows the cause of the homeless people and what are the reason of their homeless, as well as the description of the image what the image depicts about the homeless man and the bystanders.

Body:

The homeless man is the subject of the image .The whole concept of this image seems to revolve around the homeless man who’s laying there on the sidewalk asleep. The picture would not have been descriptive of the social problems it currently describes if the homeless man was not sleeping on the sidewalk. Although all elements in the picture work together to complete it but the main focus is on the homeless man, in the current context the homeless man denotes the aspect of poverty in society and the gulf that exists between the social classes. Furthermore, the more obvious things it shows is the very low quality of life that he lives with ,owning a knapsack as his wardrobe and some old newspapers as his bed. The image has not been photographed merely for the purpose of photography, it rather focuses on deep social issues, some may deem it to be a purely political attempt to defame the society, but upon further research one finds that the social issues highlighted in the image do really exist and the majority may acknowledge their existence. The social system has been evolving since the dawn f humankind and what we see today is the result of thousands of years of evolutionary progress. Sadly somewhere along the lines the human race derailed itself from the lines of progress. (Bri Trypuc, 2009)

When the concept of personal greed and gain set in and the lust for material goals and worldly power gained firmed grounds in the evolving human psychology, it turned man into a savage with the compassion fading away. The image focuses exactly on that, where a luxury sedan worth more than an average man’s annual income is parked next to a man who only has a knapsack and some clothes to his name and he is unsure of the fact that he will be able to find a meal that particular day or not. Now the sad part is that the rich or the “fortunate” don’t really care about the society or people around them as long as their own bellies are full. The photographer has tried to target a large audience as the picture has been seen floated on the internet .The larger the audience the larger the awareness of the message in the picture, The photographers approach and tone is very direct because there are no hidden clues in the image and the image very simply and directly touches the issue at hand. (Levine)

simple and direct approach appeals to a larger audience as people of all circles can easily comprehend the message that is being conveyed. The photographer intends to make the masses realize the social problems that they are apparently oblivious of. When people see and comprehend such a strong yet simple image it is expected to give rise to feelings compassion and helping each other among them. Some other effects that it could have on the audience is an indirect effect where one who has seen this image would cut down on their lavish expenses realizing the fact that there are people less fortunate than they are. It may also take an individual away from the greed of gaining more and more, making him realize that how much he already has. The photographer bases his photograph on the concept of the bystander effect, the fact that people are willing to move on without acknowledging another humans misfortune, and taking it as something which is very acceptable socially. This way it simply invites the audience to connect with the message that is being conveyed through the image. Or we can summarize it as Social problems in a nutshell or much rather an image. (Bachrach, 1970)

Causes:

They usually affect the reasons why these people are in this situation breaks ties are of three types:

Breakdown of family and personal ties: Have no usual or not maintain any contact with their immediate and extended family relationship. It might be because of the death of one or else further members of a family, the distance between them, an obsession, sickness or bodily or cerebral disarray and so on. Breaking business tie, on the streets citizens are without a job or else does not encompass a stable job to provide them with a steady revenue, although most likely had it. A predictable 10% of this populace has even college. Breakdown of social ties, the homeless (before or after the way they are) may lose their friends or may be institutional constraints (legal or police problems). It can be a gradual process or a sudden break because their friends turn their back to not accept their situation.

In psychology frequently referred to these actions due to worrying life actions. These rupture be able to and are frequently characterize by three features: Are chained together, that is, one break a person life might lead to another break. One can take an example that if a person losses his or her job that can also lead to some loss on in the family due to the stress of losing the job and end up in fights and quarrels. They are shocking. Reason of a high psychological suffering in the person, thus that his determination might be weakened in such a way which is not inspiration to revisit to reconstruct their tie and escort a civilized life. In addition, the street life often aggravates apathy. They are sharp. The person may have lived there several large chains and a trauma away in time during their life, but probably one of the causes takes you directly to the street. That is, homelessness is not a thing that is deliberation, other than a quick way out to get gone from the pain or the only option after being evicted from their usual place of residence (Best, 1995)

Conclusion:

To conclude one must note that an image such as the one discussed above is a very effective and powerful tool to communicate to a larger audience without saying much. To be living in an era of prevailing social problems, these artistic yet informative images help in educating as well as shaping the public opinion. We’ve discussed one such image which focuses on social problems which are interrelated and commonly neglected. Starting from the bystander effect, it very successfully describes the concept as people pass by a man who is less fortunate than they are without even acknowledging his existence. Another inter-related problem it focuses on is the gulf between the different social classes which prevail in the contemporary times. With expensive cars and nicely clothed people in the same image as a man who’s sleeping on newspapers the photographer very simply yet effectively highlights this social problem. Furthermore another broader aspect of this picture is the loss of compassion in the social system today. Finally the photographer has quite impressively pulled off the feat of presenting several social problems in one simple black and white image.

Works Cited

Bachrach, P. B. (1970). Power and poverty : theory and practice . New York : Oxford University Press .

Best, J. (1995). Images of Issues Typifying Contemporary Socail Problems. New York: ALDINE DE GRUYTER.

Bri Trypuc, J. R. (2009). Homeless in Canada. Charity Intelligence Canada.

Levine, D. M. (n.d.). Rethinking Bystander Non-Intervention: Socail catogrisation and the evidence of witnesses at the James Bulger murder trail. Lancaster.

Mario Luis Small, D. J. (2010). Reconsiderin Cuture and Poverty.