Our Children Under Influence

In class today we watched a disturbing film, "Sexy Inc.: Our Children Under Influence."  It showed how society and media today has influence young children to believe that dressing sexy is the thing to do. The young girls believe its the only way they can be happy because in advertisements the women look happy. It's sad to think that children are missing out on their childhood.

The other day me and my friend went for a bike ride. It was starting to get dark so we began to bike home. On a hill side were a few young kids around the age of 12. I found insulting and disturbing when we passed and one yelled out, "I like your a**!" I think back to when I was that age and remember my parents telling me I had to be homer before the sun set. On top of this I don't recall me even thinking of provocative things, I use to write on sidewalks with chalk and rollarblade around town with my friends. Children these days are so manipulated by the media that it makes me sick to think what my kids will be like if society continues with its ways.

The video mentioned that young girls around the age of 14 are wearing spaghetti strap tank tops and thongs. When I was 14 I hated tank tops I always wore t-shirts and as for thongs I never thoughts I'd ever wear one, I never could understand the concept of a string going up your butt....

There was a girl in our class that mentioned how sad children are today and that her younger sister whose in grade 11 is embarrassed that she's the only virgin in that grade. This shocked me very much so in the fact that when I was in grade 11 the majority of people in my grade WERE virgins. There's a 16-year-old boy I work with and the stories he tells be about being with girls makes me sick. I try to tell him that some of his stories are not cool at all. He mentioned to me that when he broke up with his girlfriend that he had sexual intercourse with her best friend on a hill at a park. I had only one word to say to that and it was DESPICABLE!

My boss went to Vegas for 4 days and asked us all what we wanted her to bring back and the 16-year-old-boy said the cards that pimps hand out for prostitutes!

Kids of today make be not want to have kids at all! Society needs to change and it needs to change fast!

A picture I got off a website on google

Which Thoery Would I Choose?

In class we learnt about 4 theorist:
1. Kaplan- therapeutic view consisting of 3 stages and based on sexual dysfunctions and what is wrong in a relationship.

2. Basson- a woman's approach and view on sexual response and how they see it.

3. Freud- based on the development stages upon young children. Believed that clitoral orgasm was immature and vaginal orgasm was mature. Children first experience pleasure through their mouths called the oral phase and later on in life through their genitals called the genital phase. Immature development occurs when an individual is stuck in the oral phase.

4. Master's and Johnson's- 4 step cycle and believe in only one kind of orgasm.

We were giving two questions:
1. Which of the four do you find most compelling?
I believe Master's and Johnson's 4 step cycle is most compelling. I believe this because there's makes the most sense to me due to my own experiences. The four phases(excitement, plateau, orgasm, and resolution) all occur except orgasm sometimes does not. Freud had no evidence with his work therefore I believe a lot of what he says is his own perspective. I find Basson's to be bias due to the fact that its from a woman's point of view; a man's view on sexual response could be different. Kaplan is too negative for me. I believe relationships should be based on happiness and intimacy not " let's pin point whats wrong in the relationship." Therefore I believe Master's and Johnson's is more realistic and compelling to me.

2. Which of the four do you find least compelling?
I find Freud's to be least compelling not only to the fact that he had no evidence, but also that he believes outrages things. Saying that a clitoral orgasm is immature makes a woman feel as if the only thing on her body that is mature is her vagina. I find it degrading towards women. Even though I do believe in his oral and genital phases, I don't understand why he yet again places an immature and mature status upon them. I also get the sense that Freud only believed in traditional orgasms and sex in which it is used for reproduction. I get this sense due to the fact that he doesn't believe clitoral orgasm is mature and that gay pleasure is unhealthy. For all these reasons, I believe Freud is a crazy man!

Master's and Johnson's 4 Phase Sexual Response Cycle

Today in class we went over a concept which I learned already in PSYC 260. I found it an interesting and easy concept to remember when I first learned it and still do. In PSYC 260 I learnt just the four phases but in class today I learnt what happens in each phase in both the male and female bodies.

Phase 1: Excitement- (males) An erection occurs and the testes increase in size and elevate up closer to the body. (females) Lubrication occurs, and erection of the clitoris happens, and breast size increases. Both sexes have an increase in heart rate and blood pressure. Mytonia also occurs.

Phase 2: Plateau-(males)The Cowper's gland secretes drops of fluid, the testes get into position for ejaculation. (female) The uterus increases in size and elevates.

Phase 3: Orgasmic-(male) Contractions and ejaculation occurs and the sphincter relaxes. (female) 3-15 contractions occurs and tension is released. Both experience body spasms.

Phase 4: Resolution-(male) the first bit of blood with-draws within the 1st minute and the rest after. (female) Released blood from the genital and breasts. Mytonia is released for both sexes.

In PYSC 260 we saw the 4 phases as a diving board. Climbing up the latter is the excitement, walking across the board to the end is the plateau, jumping off is the orgasm, and floating in the water is the resolution. I find that concept is an easy way of remembering the 4 phases.

This is a picture we received in PYSC 260 to remember the 4 phases

Private Dicks: Men Exposed

Today we watched a surprising film called Private Dicks: Men Exposed. It was shocking at first to see naked men all over the screen but after awhile I stopped noticing that they were even naked. I noticed most people found it surprising to see naked men in a film. I think the reason for this is that in most Hollywood movies the men are never naked, they may be shirtless but never naked. It's usually the women who are exposed in Hollywood films.

Comparing Private Dicks to the Vagina Monologues

I found that the vagina monologues were more theatrical than the private dicks film. The male film was more real; it had real men naked in front of a camera. There were no parts or scripts in the private dick film. The men told their experiences and what they thought about their dick and how society revolves around the size of it.

A girl in my discussion group made a very good point in that males may shower together but they will not look at each other whereas when females change together they see each other as just another woman; their not afraid to look at one another. I believe this is due to the fact that the males are afraid they will be seen as "gay" if they did look at another naked man. Same goes with strip clubs. You will always see males and females at the females strip clubs but if you ever go to a male strip club, the majority will be females. It's very rare to find a male at the male strip clubs. Both sexes compare their bodies. Men compare the penises to others while women compare their breasts to others. It's a natural born concept to do so. Why we do it is another question that I cannot answer.

Vagina Monologues

The other day in class we watched a vagina monologue on the period. The video shocked me because the period isn't an everyday topic. Most woman will complain to each other when the time comes but that's about it; it's not an everyday conversation, especially between sexes. I never heard of vagina monologues until the other day so I decided to look up a few and listen to them. I recently found this one on YouTube.



The woman in this video makes a good point. Shaving the vagina is a pain in the bum but most woman do it. For some odd reason I thought of it as normal until I watched this video. So why do woman shave anyways? Most will say they don't like hair but yet we wouldn't shave our hair on our head constantly. She made good point in the fact that most men like it shaved but yet most women like the males to be shaved as well. I believe that if you don't mind shaving than why stop? It doesn't mean you don't respect your vagina it just means that you like it tidy.

Kinsey

Today in class we learned a bit about an extravagant man named Alfred Kinsey. He was born in 1894 and became one of the first to actually research human sexuality. There's a recent movie called "Kinsey" which we also watched in class. The movie informed me on how Kinsey thought about sexual normalcy. I believe Kinsey, according to the movie, did not have a definition for sexual normalcy, instead I believe that he considered every sexual action to be normal; there was no abnormal or not normal sexual activity. Kinsey in a way broke the normal wall that most people during the Victorian time had towards human sexuality. He destroyed all the rumors and took a risk in his life by publishing a book on human sexuality.

This is a movie clip from the 2004 film "Kinsey"

Watching the clip makes you realise how society can control one's thoughts and behaviours. Society can kill a human being with its over powering regulations and beliefs. Kinsey risked his career as a professor as well as his identity to create a book that changed the lives of many citizens during that time and present. He broke through the "unspoken" barrier society had placed upon human sexuality at that time. After watching the film I believe and see Kinsey more than a professor and researcher, I see him as a hero; someone that changed the lives of many people and may have even saved them.





The Scientific Method

The other day in class we learnt about the scientific method of research and the 4 steps within it.
1. Create a research question.
2. Create an hypothesis.
3. Test it
4. Draw a conclusion

So in class we did an activity for this but instead of testing our question we explained how it would be tested and instead of creating a conclusion we anticipated what the results would be.

1. My question was, "Does alcohol increase the chance of a couple getting into an argument?"

2. To test my question I would randomly select couples walking down the hallway of a university which I know would not create a very accurate result but I believe that the university couples are the ones that tend to go out and drink at bars or parties and many of them will go with their partner in hand. So with this said I would then send 2 or 3 couples to the bar and have a spectator watch them. With my control group which would be the couples who are not sent to the bar, would be sent to a park or an amusement park and spend a few hours there together. I would then compare my control groups behaviour to the ones that were sent to the bar.

3. In the end I believe that the control group would have loving behaviour between them whereas I don't believe that the couples sent to the bar would all get into an argument but I do believe that at least 1 out of the 3 couples would get into  an argument.

4. I would then anticipate finding results that alcohol MAY increase the chance of a couple getting into an argument.

This is a picture I found on google which I believe resembles that sometimes alcohol can get in the way of a relationship.

Habermas' Paradigms

Going into Fam322 I did not expected to learn about human sexuality through a world view and how it fits into society.I believed we would learn the more physical and psychological side of it. But with that said I  did learned a very important concept on the first couple of days called "paradigms" which in a way is a world view or a global perspective on concepts. Habermas had three paradigms, empirical- analytic, critical theoretic, and situational interpretive. I live through situational interpretive, where I define a concept by using my own experiences for example, falling in love. I'm not a romantic at all and actually hate getting flowers and having candle light dinners so in my prospective I believe falling in love is finding a best friend, a companion, and someone you think about 24/7. I also see it as a piece of me, without my boyfriend I would feel as if I lost a part of my identity. Some concepts such as love, should be only viewed through situational interpretation not through the empirical-analytic paradigm which is the scientific view point. I stand behind my decision because humans has their own personality, their own identity, therefore shouldn't their thoughts on concepts differ as well? Not all perspectives on love is like mine.There are several views in the world on love, therefore love should not be given a definition. In conclusion concepts like love should not have a definition and placed within textbooks, they should be seen differently through all eyes.