Introduction
The world of today’s morality undergoes different transformations in terms of peoples’ orientation in personal life. The tendency of heterosexual relationships does not interest the society anymore due to several factors. Humanity is rather concerned about many other needless events, processes, or matters of life. It appears to be that heterosexuality loses its position in lives of people due to strong criticism and attention of the observers paid on the non-traditional tendencies in relationships. In this respect the paper deals with the aspect of sociological research on the problem of heterosexuality and a lack of constructive data as for the sociological survey on the issue. The reality shows outrageous intentions of many analytics, critics, and experts of social relations to concentrate public opinion on the amorality rather than on the morality emerging in the society. Structural parts of the paper take into account the evaluation of heterosexual trends in the social life and its impacts on the state of morality within masses. All in all, the bellow discussion is intended to identify points on heterosexuality as a major trend in peoples’ relationships. The question ‘why has there been so little sociological research on heterosexuality?’ is placed in the paper as the paramount for making estimation of the problem and then conclusions about it clear comprehensive.
Evaluation
Before speaking about the issue of heterosexuality, it is significant to state that in most cases from ancient times this approach was thought and used as the only for the institution of family. In fact, the flows of relationships between people point out the reciprocal sympathy and hopes for the future elaboration of a relationship between both a man and a woman. Such type of orientation is considered to be traditional and underlines a normal evaluation of a man stringing along with such motivation.
In present days people in the United States, in particular, are characterized to frequently forget about the sociological background of heterosexuality trying to protect their own beliefs and attitudes toward relationships. A poor sociological research about the problem is concerned mainly with a belief inside the society that heterosexuals are everywhere and that this trend of social development is taken for granted to be the primary. Thereupon, people are convinced that there is no need to discover this problem in terms of sociological analysis with appropriate statistical data.
Paul James Johnson (2005) proves the statement that there are several factors which influenced the situation. Among them are: a total decline of moral aspects in the society, the flow of feminist movement in America and an impact of mass media. Thus, the author is convinced to outline:
Much like ethnicity, where whiteness remains normative and invisible (and yet is, of course, everywhere) heterosexuality is everywhere and nowhere. Use any library online catalogue and search for the word ‘heterosexual’ and the list will show, if lucky, ten books; type in ‘homosexuality’ and the list will multiply to hundreds (Johnson 6).
In fact, it is surprising enough. The paradox is grounded on the abnormal tendency in the source materials for studying heterosexual development of relationships. It means, on the other hand, that heterosexuals are passive in actions and attempts to show their identity toward normal development of affairs in personal intimate life. The idea of orientation does not worry heterosexuals much. In this respect scholars and researchers are more inclined to work out themes concerned mostly with other than heterosexual trends in love and relationships. Kenneth Plummer (2002) supports this idea with a statement that mainstream omits “the social production of heterosexuality”, having instead the background of traditional orientation quite degraded and without any convincing motivation in peoples’ choice of heterosexuality (Plummer 239). It was supported also with a political coloring of the problem, because heterosexuals do not object to the abnormal elaboration and estimation of sexual preferences within people living in the society. Such norm gives way toward the flow of various non-traditional movements in terms of making their understanding of sexual life proved.
Feministic approach is also strong in terms of heterosexuality’s decrease in sociological research. It is due to a statement of feminists that there are obvious facts of “compulsory heterosexuality” as a tool for making women dependent on a will of men (Kirby 717). In a gender-oriented aspect feminists provide a claim that in the world of men there is no place for heterosexuality due to a reason that in heterosexual families there is no equality in the majority of cases. Such conviction makes the feminist movement one of the most influential in the US. Nevertheless, there should be a mentioning of the societal interest in something non-traditional because of the scandalous and somehow outrageous theme in lives of people, especially when such people are well-known.
Discussion on Homosexuality
Homosexual tendency in the social development of the United States and in the world, on the whole, is concerned with the idea of stating the fact of such people. In other words, in the society this category of people, being a minority, accepts more rights than it was previously. In this case both heterosexuality and homosexuality became understood as equal trends in the development of the relationships, as if there is no intrinsic difference between above mentioned two categories. In the book Homosexuality and the law: a dictionary Chuck Stewart (2001) notes: “The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has made it official policy that homosexuality and heterosexuality are equally valid, yet many practitioners still attempt to convert homosexuals to a heterosexual orientation” (Stewart 146). In this respect it is normal to tell about homophobia when there are any cases of assault toward a man with non-traditional orientation. It considers also the situations when people with heterosexual orientation just express their negative attitude toward homosexuals. In Europe such attitudinal background may serve as a stimulus to arrest a man.
Though, many experts admit that when a person performs a homosexual act, it is not necessarily the evidence of his homosexuality (Moran, 96). This means that actually the latent nature of homosexuality is covered in people, and it is hard then to define the extent of homosexuality in the society. Since, it gives more themes for discussion of the homosexuality, as a social entity. Though, this issue becomes more popular, notwithstanding that it is condemned and laughed at within the society.
The homosexual tendency according to the natural way of reproduction of further populations proves the idea that there are no perspectives in suchlike spread of national growth with its genealogical coloring. Moreover, it may cause the degeneration of the nation, as a result. A well-known proverb replies ‘Nature abhors a vacuum’, so Americans may be replaced with Asian representatives, especially from Arabic countries, due to the further popularization of homosexuality.
Law Framework
First of all, in this portion of the discussion it is necessary to define the position of law toward the concept of orientation. In this respect it may be helpful to outline the framework of law base toward major and minor directions as for the orientation. Eric Krot (2005), an observer of sexual life of people living in the US, touched upon the American structure of laws. In his review the author states the following:
Sexual orientation is defined in the law as: “Actual or perceived heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality or gender-related identity, whether or not traditionally associated with the person’s designated sex at birth. Sexual orientation does not include a physical or sexual attraction to a minor by an adult” (Krot 7).
The law in this case seems to place a neutral position. Then, there is a fair question: For what reason and on what base such laws are constructed? Laws are known to be implemented from ancient times in order to provide stability of relationships inside a country; they were related to the moral grounds of the society and its urge for most significant values. On the other hand, people have rights, and rights of people living in the same society should be equal, as a matter of fact. That is why homosexuals insist on their protection by law (Lance 789). For the purpose of gaining heterosexuality more rights and points to admit its prevalence and status of ‘compulsory’, it “must present itself as a practice governed by some internal necessity” in accordance to the law (Jackson 173).
Conclusion
To sum up, it is vital to notice that the decline of sociological research in heterosexuality is concerned with a morality decrease. This statement is outlined with national initiatives to actively support people having homosexual relationships (McGhee 137) and a tendency of no interference of people into sexual affairs of other people.
Works cited
Jackson, Stevi. Heterosexuality in question. New York: SAGE, 1999.
Johnson, Paul James. Love, heterosexuality, and society. London: Routledge, 2005.
Kirby, Mark. Sociology in perspective. Hamburg: Heinemann, 2000.
Krol, Eric. “Governor Cites Bible in Signing Anti-Bias Law.” Daily Herald (Arlington Heights, IL) 2005: 7.
Lance, Larry M. “Social Inequality on the College Campus: A Consideration of Homosexuality.” College Student Journal 42.3 (2008).
McGhee, Derek. Homosexuality, law, and resistance. London: Routledge, 2001.
Moran, Leslie J. The homosexual(ity) of law. London: Routledge, 1996.
Plummer, Kenneth. Sexualities: critical concepts in sociology. London: Taylor & Francis, 2002.
Stewart, Chuck. Homosexuality and the law: a dictionary. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 2001.