Take Home Exam 2016
Question #1: All about love
In discussing the consequences of emotional underdevelopment in males with respect to society’s demands that they must show strength in being tough demonstrating no outward expression of physical or emotional pain, it is an unrealistic demand. Essentially, there is no significant biological differences between males and females to create this distorted demand. Males and females are humans with equal emotional needs. Why should a man due to gender suppress his needs and a woman allowed to cry and express hers being considered the weaker sex? More importantly, how do these emotional imbalances affect the way love is understood from a gender perspective. It must be realized that gender is a social construction. Therefore, a man must first and foremost be allowed his human rights of being human and a woman too (Tarrant, 2013).
The contention by many experts that this phenomenon creates underdevelopment in males’ ability to truly expressing affection. It is empathetic to see how males grieve and become ill when they lose loved ones or some serious event occurs in their family. For me pretending to be tough is tough in itself. This destroys the emotional integrity of men. Instead men should be taught how to be strong by expressing their selfhood. Toughness often leads to being hash also. A man or bior then becomes emotionally confused in do not knowing how to be in love and sustain it. In essence, this from my point of view meaning of boys learning to grow up being insensitive. It like when people go to military he/she is taught to act and perform like someone ready to kill. No human tenderness exists under such circumstances. When these individuals reunite with family and friends it is difficult to interact in a loving way.
Question #2: Feminization after Sexual Assault
Reasons for this consequence account of males’ under-reporting their experiences as abuse victims pertain first to men being socialized as victors and not victims. Another major reason relates to the circumstances under which the offense was committed. For example, some men are raped by women. According to Tarrant (2013) this deflates the ego into which they were socialized. Male chauvinism is another societal element that produces this consequence. Society created the gender male as being dominant. How could a man report rape of any form be it from a woman or man to a policeman? If it is a female police this action to the ego of a man is disgraceful reducing him to female gender or weaker sex, a category to which he does not socially belong. Besides, many rape cases against men are performed in the military and victims are afraid to speak up due to victimization (Tarrant, 2013).
This consequence accounts for the prevalence of homophobia among heterosexual males from many perspectives. For example, a rape incidence involving another male may result in arousal of the victim’s emotions towards the same sex. However, being heterosexual these men do not want to be labelled homosexual or indulge in th behavior. Hence, these men live with the fear that this arousal could explode one day and the desire for a same sex relationship may surface. When the rape occurs with the opposite sex it leaves the male feeling afraid that his masculinity is challenged to be raped by a woman or a number of them. The fear being raped again as well as the development of an inferior sexual feeling capability as a man is a contributory factor to the consequence account for the prevalence of homophobia among heterosexual males (Tarrant, 2013).
Question # 3: Vulnerability of sexual violence among women
Gender experts contend that femininity is relative to social conditions that vary with cultural orientation. As such, it manifests as weakness, passivity and dependence. These attributes of being feminine create a woman’s vulnerability towards sexual violence. Women are kept oppressed because first many of them are economically incapable of providing for themselves with respect to food, clothing, shelter and basic necessities of life. There has been an historical culture whereby in some societies women have to be subservient to men. They function almost like slaves without any authority to speak up for themselves. This is the norm within that particular culture. There is biblical evidence of women being stoned to death if caught in sexual actions, which were unlawful. However, but penalties were given to the male with whom the sex action was committed (Tarrant, 2013).
The characteristic dependence embedded in the structured way of life for women exposes them to sexual violence. When women cannot work and they depend on a male partner for financial support limited opportunities for independence exist. In some situations, men believe that women serving as wives are their property. Property has no rights to make decisions on its own. Therefore, women as property being dependent on a male master makes them vulnerable to several forms of violence including. This dependence emerges into passivity since women become voiceless in difficult circumstances. Thy have no power to defend or protect themselves against abuse that escalates into violence. Involuntary submission ultimately converges in passivity and hopelessness. The fulfilling prophecy to the squeal of this phenomenon is declaration of women as being weaker sex. This is clearly a socially constructed characteristic imposed upon them in an effort to keeping them oppressed and underdeveloped (Tarrant, 2013).
Question # 4: Patriarchy the double-edged sword
Tarrant (2013) argued that the men practicing patriarchy represent action figures interwoven into a collective imagination. It was further clarified that the practice targets a specific group of people, but affects everyone. Five reasons for the practice being viewed this way, firstly relates to the uneven distribution of power that exist within the relationship. The position of power is placed upon males within the family structure. Progression of it is also through male lineage. While this might be considered a positive feature, the woman within the family structure suffer from power deprivation (Tarrant, 2013).
They are nonparticipant observers to men wilding power in the family relationship. The advantage of women giving up their power to men relates to them being provided for financially and socially by the mal head of household. Secondly, the two edged sword philosophy directly encompasses the cost of allowing male dominance succession for centuries. This involves women losing value as persons within their culture. It is as if they and their children were at the same level in the family structure with their sons gaining dominance over them even when still children. Thirdly, boys are taught to take responsibility at an early age, but at the same time some degree of disrespect for women is learnt. This is translated into the wider society to hurt everyone (Tarrant, 2013).
A fourth reason for this consideration relates to girls growing up with the misconception that boys are stronger and have better intellectual skills. In societies where girls are prohibited from formal schooling it would appear that boys are more intellectually capable than girls, which is a fallacy. Finally, society hurts because great talent become absorbed in a patriarchal family form, which allows only one gender progress/ social development (Tarrant, 2013).
References
Tarrant, S. (2013). Men Speak Out: Views on Gender, Sex and Power. New York. Routledge
