Late first response-February 14th:

When I read the assigned articles I kept coming back to how all these topics are conceptual and therefore psychological in nature. This is best demonstrated when discussing human sexuality. Sexuality is difficult to define in a clinical context, and even more elusive in a systemic or social context. Historically, sexual behavior was interpreted though religious, or ‘moral’ institutions; the industrial revolution revealed the power of science, therefore, sexuality was discussed in terms of primitive mechanical devices (steam engines for example). During the advent of psychology in the late 1800’s sexuality was seen as a conflict between the impulsive but subconscious Id, the rational ego, and the punishing super ego, which placed a focus on female sexuality and male genitals. Ultimately Freud’s Psychodynamics would be challenged by Behaviorism, and later the cognitive revolution in the 1970’s. Until recently, academics had a tendency to medicalize everything, including sexuality and gender roles with social constructs.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s