Nichol's article response.

There LGBT communities in many African countries, but very few are known because they are afraid of coming out since they are not accepted by the society in fact in countries like Uganda LGBT people get killed by their government. Back home, I didn’t even know about LGBT because no one talked about it and if people of the same sex had sexual relationship, people were just saying that “it’s a taboo and a sin against God and there is something wrong with these people”, but no one knew that it was their identity. Just like any other minority group, LGBT members face many problems in their communities in terms of employment, social, education, family,….. and we can say that they face discrimination like other minority groups.

We found Conflict Theory in this article where homosexual people face power struggle and inequality from people who are not homosexual (those who are considered to be normal by the world). Homosexuality can prevent people from accessing opportunities like scholarships, leadership, employment because of their identity.

Symbolic Interaction: Not being accepted by the society makes homosexual people blame themselves, feel isolated and that’s why we have a big number of suicides among them. The fact that even their own families don’t accept them sometime, makes the situation worse.
Functionalism: An example of countries like Uganda where the government authorizes the law of killing LGBT people and the fact that many states in USA don’t accept marriage between same sex people, is a sign that this world is far away from accepting LGBT communities.

Members of LGBT communities and their supporters have to fight had for their freedom and acceptance and this will take educating the young generation (who can prevent this discrimination in the future), law makers,.... However, i think the main point that infuence discrimination against LGBT communities is that many people believe that LGBT members have choice and control over their identity (that they made a choice of being homosexual and that they can chose to change that identity). Either this is really a choice or not, i don't know.

Homophobia in Society

I recently read an article for my gender studies class called "How Homophobia Hurts Everyone." As I was reading this, I was able to put some of the sociological perspectives with what this article was saying. The author of this article states that homophobia works of four distinct but interacting levels, which are:
1. Personal: This is where people hold their own personal beliefs or prejudice about LGBTs (lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transexuals) that they should be pitied, phychologically disturbed, hated, defective, or being inferior to homosexuals.
2. Interpersonal: This is where the personal prejudices affect relations among individuals by transforming prejudice into discrimination through name calling, violence, rejecting, etc.
3. Institutional: This is when governments, businesses, educational systems, religions, and professional organizations systimatically discriminate on the bases of sexual orientation through laws, codes, and policies.
4. Cultural: These are the social norms or codes of behavior that work within a society that legitimize oppression. For example, the media and history excluding images of LGBT people.
Conflict theory would look at this as LGBT people versus the rest of society. The "norms" in society are constantly oppressing LGBT people because they are seen as different, thus a threat to society. Many LGBTs struggle with getting health coverage or being accepted into many religions. The struggles they encounter are endless because society stigmatizes them as different. And when one group is being pushed down, the other one pushing them down is naturally benefiting from this by fitting into society and getting the jobs, health care, housing, and just generally accepted by most people.
This also can be looked at with symbolic interactionism. What part of our sociolization has created the labels of "fag", "butch", "queer", or the term "gay" as meaning stupid? LGBTs are seen as differing form the norm of society through the norms set by all social institutions. The main part of this article states why homophobia hurts not only LGBTs, but also heterosexuals as well. A couple interesting ones to point out are; it compromises the integrity of heterosexuals by pressuring them into treating others badly, which actions are contrary to their basic humanity. Another one he mentions is that homophobia restricts communications with a significant portion of the population and limits family relationships. It's interesting when looked at from this point of view because it puts negetive outcomes on both the opressed and the opressors.

Social Systems vs. Rape Victims

When looking at Campbell's article through the conflict theory, it is easy to link together the three social systems talked about in this article (legal, medical, and mental health) and put them as a competing group against the rape victims. More specifically, what the victim wants to get out of these social systems versus what these social systems will offer them. Each of these systems show on the surface that they are readily available for a rape victim, but after reading this article it seems that they are only there to assist a victim if their case falls into what fits best for them. In each case, the social systems are the dominant group with the victims being dependent on them to receive support.

If a rape case doesn't contain certain criteria (use of a weapon, not knowing the rapist, and not being under the influence of alcohol), then it is often seen that these cases are ended in a way that opposes what the victim wants. The police hold the power in that they can decide whether or not to even pass a case further on to the prosecutors. So how can this the police benefit from this kind of discrimination? You would think that the more cases that went through prosecution, the more they would be seen as doing better at their job. But when they hold the very power of deciding which cases should be taken further, thus fitting into the victims desired outcome, they have power over every rape victim. The victim is now dependent on the legal system to receive protection, whether they get it or not.

The same goes for the victims receiving help from a mental health institution. The victims that show more outward acceptance to help will be the ones given the most help. It kind of seems that the cases that show from the beginning to have a positive ending are the ones that are given the most attention. The victims that don't fall into conformation with what the mental health system sees as ideal are faced with either receiving help from loved ones who most likely will not have the training needed to help the victim, not receiving help, or conforming into the "good victim" behavior to receive the help they need. Once again the social system holds the power over the victims.

The medical system could potentially be the most detrimental of all if service is denied to a rape victim. Rape can lead to STDs, unwanted pregnancies, and other bodily injuries that could cause instant or future damage. Many victims are still in a state of shock and don't know what processes needs to be taken to make sure they are alright. If certain antibiotics or knowledge is withheld from a victim, it could affect them long term. But in the end, it's the medical system that holds the tools needed to properly care for a rape case. The victim will always be reliant on the medical system.

I think this quote can sum up how the conflict theory would look at these social systems versus rape victims: "When certain characteristics of the victim, the assault, and the community are in careful alignment, the likelihood of an outcome that is consistent with the victims needs is most probable."

Diversity in America

This post is about diversity in America.