5. Alternative REading
On ERES please read the second essay in the first section on Sexuality Health and Gender. Then read the last two articles in the second section on Sexuality Health and Gender.
For each, identify the writer's point of view (bias, preconceived ideas), the writer's intended audience, and the purpose.
For each comment on the organization and structure.
For each discuss whether you agree or disagree with the author and why. Give specific examples.
For each, identify the writer's point of view (bias, preconceived ideas), the writer's intended audience, and the purpose.
For each comment on the organization and structure.
For each discuss whether you agree or disagree with the author and why. Give specific examples.
posted by DrEmmerling at 10:13 PM
11 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Scott’s article brings about an important point that parallels the article we read last week by Stoltenberg. The writing is forceful and informal. The target of the article is to cause people comfortably identifying themselves as queer (more so gay or lesbian) to question the fluidity of their sexuality and recognize the walls they are placing around themselves by locating themselves within a given sexual category. While the writer attacks such things as gay pride parades and other acts that divide queers into categories, I believe that unity/acceptance and separation are the two ends of a double-edges sword. While it would be ideal to have all of society cast away their labels and live together in harmony we are not yet at this stage. We must recognize each others’ differences and sometimes ban together on common differences to make our voices heard and to provide a temporary safe haven.
Karen Testerman’s article is intended to evoke fear and has a clear agenda to condemn extramarital/ premarital sex. She even includes a little article that reinforces stereotypes about the medical dangers of homosexuality (which mind you is always out of wedlock because gay couples cannot marry). The article seemed to be aimed at parents and young teens. Also, this article was a little disjointed and confusing because of the excerpts from other articles that were included randomly.
While Sardar makes some very good points about the direction in which sexual expression is moving, in an unbounded and mechanical direction, I think he took it a little too far. After all, who would want to buy a “love” pill? Also, some of the things he described are still not seen as “normal” by many people, some reasonably so and some not. Also, I question his sexuality. Is he heterosexual? Because if he is, of course a loosening of the limitations on “healthy” and “okay” sexual expression would not make his sex life any better, but how about someone who is queer who would finally be able to fearlessly and guiltlessly be open about their sexual orientation. Does he orgasm during sex? Because a tool such as a vibrator may help someone who can’t. The essay is written in a mocking tone and is directed mostly at adult society.
Scott's piece is meant for those that caterogize themselves as Queer. His tone has a harsh and informal voice to it that turned me off to this piece. It seems like he is blaming the people who are gay for segregting themselves from society just for excepting this sexual label. Although it would be ideal for labels to not exsist in society Scott is critisizing the queer comunity for unifying and therefore seperating themselves from society.
Testerman's main objective in her article is to scare the bejesus out of those who are gay and participating in premartial sex. She is critical and shares her opinion on how wrong the lifestyle of a homosexal is. This piece was aimed towards an adult audience. I too felt this article was a little confusing because of the excerps that kept surfacing inthe middle of her article.
Sardar's essay was very much for the adult audience. His tone came off as sarcastic and mocking to me and he was a little over the top. Sardar explains how sexual expression is moving in a mechanical direction and how people sometimes feel it hard to express themselves in a sexual manner.
Scott is designed for the percentage of the population that considers themselves “the Queer Folk.” The writer’s harsh language attacks gay pride, their actions, and their moral beliefs. Some of his arguments I agree with and some I don’t. I do, however, disagree with his method of delivery. Our differences are what make us US. I do not agree with most ideals of the gay community, but I do respect their beliefs as their own, as this author should.
Testerman uses her opinions and beliefs to scare and intimidate those who consider themselves gay or lesbian. She uses little or no fact to condemn those who also engage in sex before marriage, and outside it. I did not like the article, as it was all opinion, and badly written.
Sardar was a difficult read. It was geared towards the older audience and had, as Jessica said, “very sarcastic and over the top.” I agree with several of his points about sexual manner and its direction. Some of his points, were unusual to say the least. I was not impressed at all.
The first essay was extremely entertaining. I thought it had a bit of sas to it, but still got across the point that there are too many labels. And it's not just the "un-labeled" over-emphasising these stereotypes, but also the "labeled" themselves. The target of the article is to question people's perceptions of "labeled"/heterosexuals and why they do what they do. His main point though is that sexual orientation, which is why all labeling is done, is such a fluid thing that there is no way to hold it down with words like, homo, gay, lezbo, male, female, trans.... all of them are too concrete for what really matters. The way the essay is set up is normal, but the seperation of the paragraphs really emphasizes what needs to be heard in his tone.
The author's main purpose is to get the point across that pre-marital sex is wrong and homosexuality is a sin. Because she included a little info about the health issues realated to this topic, she really showed some fact and opinion in her essay. It was mostly aimed at adults, most likely parents.
This last piece was definitly aimed at adults and was a bit confusing. Through his sarcastic tone, I think he was trying to say that sexual behaviors are becoming less "natural" and more "mechanical". Maybe, it is just becasue i don't want to belive this, or i really feel it isn't true, i didn't enjoy this piece at all.
this essay made me a bit uncomfortable, the reason is because i felt that the queer community was in a way being attacked. i felt that the author was being a bit harsh by in a way saying that it was their fault for not being fully accepted by society. the author explains that the queer community segregates themselves and therefore in a way are at fault.
I found Testerman's essay a bit confusing and disturbing. the reason is because i felt that her objective was to prove that those participating in gay, premarital sex were comitting a dreadful sin.this article seems to be aimed toward teens and parents.
It was difficult for me to comprehend some of Sardar's opinions. i think that he might have taken everything to another level which was not necessary.
Scott's essay is intended for people who characterize themselves as gay or lesbian. It is very informal and opinionated. The author uses a lot of slang and biased notions that were unattractive to me. I feel like he is attacking the gay and lesbian community in which it is their fault for segregating themselves from society. ALthough I disagree with many of the author's beliefs, I found this article very entertaining and well organized into paragraphs which proved the author's point. The main point the author was making, the unimportance of "labels" in society, is something that I do agree with.
In Sardar's essay, he discusses the positive and negative directions that sexual expressions have gone in the past and how they will transform in the future. His tone was very opinionated and sarcastic. I think this piece is intended for an adult audience. I did not like this article very much because it is somewhat unrealistic; for example, his example of the love pill. I do agree with the author that so many sexual expressions have become accepted and normal in society that it is possible for something that is shunned or opossed today to become acceptable in the future.
Testerman mostly uses opinionated arguments to prove her point. She is against pre-marital sex and homosexuality. This article is probably for an adult audience. SHe uses some facts including stuff on STD's but overall I did not find this article very effective. This article was not well organized.
1.Scott's article is interesting and informative. A a gay man writing about homosexual issues, Scott is possibly writing to a heterosexual audience to inform or to a homosexual audience to insight thought on a set of particular lifestyle choices. I feel as if Scott's structure is nothing unusual and that he is attempting to discuss identity and labels. Scott and I agree on many issues and I enjoyed the insider's perspective that he gave me. Our society has a great deal of problems in relation to stereotyping and labeling and it is extremely important to address these issues.
2.Sardar's article has an extremely different tone than the other two. Sardar feels as if our society is going too far in relation to the commonly used phrase "sex sells". I feel as if Sardar sees a sacred ritual being distorted by our society. The article addresses male and female sexuality, the ability to change or augment or reduce one's self and that a masturbating society has been formed from all of this selling of sex.The writing style of this essay is shaming the adult sex industry and hopes to incite awareness of the increase in acts such as masturbation and porn. I feel as if sexuality is a part of human nature and that if sex sells, then sell it. I realize that capitalism increases the production of sex and truthfully American society is still much more prude than most of Europe. Nevertheless, I understand the point he is trying to make.
3. Testerman is attempting to incite fear in youths and homosexuals in this article. She uses a great deal of statistics and references yet the tone is one which condemns and makes the reader afraid/ashamed of their actions. I think this article is directed towards adults as well as teens. Additionally, I feel as if Testerman is extremely disappointed with our society and wants to put an end to all this sexual madness. She addresses many issues such as the effects of maketing sex and premarital sex as well as STD's and the dangers of sexuality. It is obvious that Testerman is extremely conservative and I do not agree with a large number of her viewpoints.
Sardar and Scott are arguing from completely different perspectives. Sardar has taken on this task as a form of research into the sexual health benefits of sex whereas Scott's arguement is a fluffy and frantic sociological rant about the Gay Community. I found them both to be interesting but in different ways. Scott uses the Gay community to expose the hypocrisy in both the straight and Gay community.
Stoltenberg shows us the fact that there is very little difference between men and women, that in fact, recent thinking is showing the fact that there are very similiar feelings and ways in which they work with men.
I think that these articles show us the varying fews and the complexity of sexuality that has always been there, but has not always been out in the open like this.
Scott’s article gave me a sense that he did not support the gay community because he did not approve of their actions and beliefs. Through his harsh language, I felt that he was targeting the gay community for performing activities or stating their beliefs in a way that separate themselves from the rest of society. I do not agree with him because I believe that everyone is entitle to exercise their own beliefs in any way that is comfortable to them. The gay community might express their beliefs in the way that unifies them the most and sends a clear message to society.
Karen Testerman’s article seems to me to be targeted to an adult audience. The main purpose of this article is to send out a message that homosexuality and pre-marital sex are sins.
Sardar’s article is also aimed at an adult audience. It is quite difficult to understand because of the article content and vocabulary. However, I could infer from the reading that the main message of this piece was informed readers about the consequences of sexual intercourse. In the article there were facts given about STD’s, most likely to scare readers in having a variety of sexual partners.
1. As a gay writer, Scott has much prior knowledge of the "gay ghettos." I think that the article is targeted toward heterosexual readers. The tone is very sarcastic but at the same time demands serious attention. Scott addresses the notion that being gay is becoming a trend. To him, the constant drawing of attention to the fact that communites are gay is hurting instead of helping gays.
2. Sadar's essay is an exploration of the world of sex we live in today. When thinking about "normal sex," Sadar became aware that there are hundreds of sexual niches that could be considered normal activities. The sexual revolution has created pathways into new areas and increased paths into old ones. Pornography is a booming industry. It is now acceptable to have a complete sex change. Sadar's end point is that sex lives are not normal, or at least can not be categorized becuase of the wide range of sexual intrigue.
3. Testerman's article is directed towards parents of teenagers as well as teens and pre-teens. This article discusses the dangers of sexual intercourse. The author empasizes the risks involved in having sex out of wedlock, supplying a long list of statistics that would scare a thirteen year old boy out of an erection. Instead of encouraging safe sex, Testerman holds that the only way to prevent contact with STDs and unwanted pregnancies is by abstaining from sex alltogether.
Post a Comment
<< Home