When a man and a woman engage in unprotected sexual intercourse, the end result tends to be life, as a child is born nine months later. Only once a man’s sperm reaches the eggs of a woman is this possible. Clearly, life and the existence of the human species as a whole is the product of sex between a man and a woman. The norm of reproduction then, is the aforementioned union between man and woman in heterosexual intercourse. Heterosexuality is viewed as the norm of most societies. This norm creates controversy regarding homosexuality, as it [homosexualism] is considered deviant and against societal norms. The topic of homosexuality is important and worth further investigation because it is surrounded by controversial issues such as gay marriages and families and its impact on society regarding the workplace, school and religion (Kafka, 2006). This paper will focus on the sociology of deviance as it pertains to male homosexuality. In addition, sociological theories on deviance will be incorporated, ultimately providing an analysis of the deviant behaviour.
Societal Norms & Opposing Views
Sexual deviance is also known as homosexuality (Schotten, 2008). Homosexuality by definition is sexual attraction to a person of the same sex (Kafka, 2006). It is deemed deviant behaviour because it is not the norm of the dominant group in society. Such failure to conform to societal norms ultimately makes homosexuality deviant behaviour to those who are unsupportive of one’s non-heterosexual orientation. According to gay right opponents, “homosexuality cannot be natural, since the human species, like all species, is designed by nature to reproduce. Since same-sex partners cannot have children on their own, this argument follows that homosexuality cannot be natural” (Kafka, 2006). Accepting homosexuality poses is a vigorous threat to the stability of marriages as they exist now and those of the future. The concept of marriage includes the idea of a man and woman committing themselves to one another. Any other arrangement such as gay marriages, contradicts the basic definition. Many worry that changing the definition of marriage may result in other forms of nontraditional marriage like bigamy or even group marriage (Kafka, 2006). A community should therefore, discourage homosexual conduct and never accept it as a valid, humanly acceptable choice and form of life (Baird & Baird, 1995). Those who do not support gay marriage have settled and somewhat accepted domestic partnerships or civil unions as an alternative (Kafka, 2006). However, anything less than full marriage equality is second-class status for gays. Homosexuals simply ask for what all heterosexuals already possess: the legal right to marry somebody they love. The purpose of marriage, as it is still debated today, plays a factor is why some refuse to accept gay marriages. There are legal and finical benefits to marriage. For instance, couples can file joint tax returns, inherit each other’s social security and pension benefits when one spouse dies, couples do not having to testify against the other in court, etc. (Kafka, 2006). Those who oppose gay marriage believe marriage is meant to preserve society (i.e. the idea of a family – mother, father, son & daughter). The government, for their best interest, should encourage people to marry and raise families by granting married couples certain benefits (as mentioned above). These benefits make it possible for couples to raise children who in turn, support the government, keep society growing and healthy, and move it forward (Kafka, 2006). It follows then that the government has no justifiable reason in granting benefits to gay couples since these relationships cannot produce the birth of children naturally. However, this view is criticized because the government still supports all heterosexual marriages whether or not the couple is capable or even keen of having children (Kafka, 2006). Advocates of gay marriage often...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document