Introduction
Numerous news articles, journals, books, and magazines, among others, have come up to explain sex, gender and sexuality. Moreover, various debates have been initiated with emphasis on establishing the science and history behind gender, sex and sexuality. However, this has resulted in more questions than answers. Psychologists, cognitive scientists, and biochemists along with other theorists have failed to arrive at a common ground concerning sexuality issues. Over the years, theorists such as Bill Summers and Maria Trumpler, among others, have tried to establish the science behind sexuality and gender. However, this has proved to be complex as they try to relate it to culture, psychology and biology. The paper will analyze a news article from Yale daily News, concerning the science of sexuality (Bhushan, p. 1).
Summary
The article starts by exuding numerous questions that have arisen concerning the science of sexuality. Among the questions brought up are the definition of desire, its description, and study as well as how it changes over a period in one’s life. Ambika Bhushan, who wrote the article, introduces two theorists, Summers and Trumpler, who are professors at Yale University. Summers is a professor in the Department of History of Science and Medicine, while Trumpler is the director of undergraduate studies. According to Summers, this field of study (gender and sexuality) is still beleaguered with many unanswered questions that try to relate it to biology, psychology, culture and biochemistry. Interestingly, the subject generated an overwhelming response from students at Yale. This is evident in Mathew Adams’ sentiment, which is further confirmed by Summers himself. Professor Trumpler on the other hand believes that this study is hinged on social science than biology. In fact, she argues that gender expression is 90% cultural and only 10% biological (Bhushan, p. 1).
Point of view of the article
This article tries to bring attention to the subject of gender and sexuality. It goes further to include professor Summers’s views on the same. In addition, it includes a response from the participants such as Adams as well as another opinion from professor Trumpler. In essence, the article tries to establish the science behind sexuality and gender. Nonetheless, what comes out clearly is the fact that this topic brings about more questions than answers. In essence, the article argues that the science behind gender and sexuality is still speculative with more emphasis on cultural differences than biology (Bhushan, p. 1).
Point of view of the Author
The author supports the fact that gender and sexuality bring about overwhelming participation from students. In the process, more questions are asked than answers given for the science behind gender and sexuality. In other words, the topic is wide and complex as it involves studying the brain and its response. Ultimately, the author concedes that science behind gender and sexuality can be drawn from many specializations’ areas such as biology, psychology, and culture, among others. In addition, he believes that gender is closely linked to culture than biology (Bhushan, p. 1).
Conclusion
Gender and sexuality are a wide topic and draws explanations from different areas of specialization. It is therefore quite true to relate gender to culture. This is mainly because culture defines masculinity and feminism. For instance, feminism is closely related to the wearing of skirts in most cultures of the world. On the other hand, other cultures such as Scotland, relate masculinity to the wearing of kilts. It is also quite important to note that biology is closely linked to the male and female aspects of sexuality. In essence, the topic draws answers from various fields and continues to attract more questions (Bhushan, p. 1).
Work Cited
Bhushan, Ambika. “Summers explores science of sexuality”. Yale Daily News. Yale Daily News, 2008.