FMST 316 Final Take Home Exam Dec 11 2023

docx

School

University of British Columbia *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

316

Subject

Sociology

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

2

Uploaded by GrandElkMaster388

Report
FMST 316 (103) Human Sexuality Final Take Home Exam – December 11 th , 2023 NAME: _____________________ STUDENT #: _____________________ This exam consists of two sections: A. 3 Short Answers B. 1 Essay Part A: 3 Short Answers (60% total) [Pick 3 out of 5] Note: Use a 1-page (single-spaced) maximum for each short answer (Times New Roman, 12p font, and 1-inch margins). [You do not need to copy the question, just begin as Part A: QX] 1. Based on Fausto-Sterling (2000), Kessler (1990), and What Does Intersex Mean? (InQueery video) (Week 2), reply to the following questions: Unless there is an urgent, medical reason at birth, who does need to “fix” intersex babies? What do intersex bodies teach us about normative views around biological sex, (a)sexuality, and genders? How did the power relationships between health professionals, parents/caregivers, and intersex babies change in the US and Canada from past to current medical practices today? 2. On Week 8, we had Stacey Forrester curating three readings and one podcast while lecturing for us on consent and relationship education. Based on that material (including the extra-credit reading on kaleidoscopic justice), reflect on the narrow/minimum (legal) versus the more expansive and caring (ethical) definitions of consent discussed that week. Consider how ideas/practices around consent and relationships are influenced by heteropatriarchal, heterosexist, white-supremacist notions of (a)sex(ualities)/gender(s) and why we need to challenge them. 3. Queer scholar Judith Butler describes gender as performative (“gender is the repeated stylization of the body” [p. 45]). In this configuration, what does Butler mean by ‘performativity’? What are the social implications of gender performativity/relationality as a theory when analyzing compulsory heteronormative and binary systems? Use one example from Creighton et al. (2017) to support your answer. 4. Black feminist legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw coined the term intersectionality to think about the negative interlocking and cumulative effects of multiple forms of discrimination (note: no need to research this). Hill Collins (2004) shows how racism, heterosexism, and Black sexuality are affected by larger macro-processes of power differential. Analyze how intersectionality works in the case of Black queer politics. Use one example from brown (2019), Santos and Santos (2018), or from Week 9’s group activity to argue in favour of the need to resist all forms of violence. 5. What does Briggs (2017) mean by “reproduction” in the US context, and why does she argue that all politics became reproductive politics? What does Davis (2019) mean by “reproductive justice”? Putting both texts in dialogue, how does Davis’ study complements Briggs’ argument of the ubiquity of reproductive politics?
FMST 316 (103) Human Sexuality Final Take Home Exam – December 11 th , 2023 Part B: 1 Essay (40 % of exam grade) [Choose 1 out of 3] Note1: Write the essay in Times New Roman, 12-point font, 1-inch margins , 1 (min.) to 2 (max.) pages, and single-spaced. You need to develop an essay-like answer (include references at the end and proper citation inside the essay, you can use any citation style but use it consistently). Note2: For the essay portion, avoid repeating readings/issues/ideas discussed in Part A of the exam. 1. One of the threads discussed in this course is the tension between ascribed (socially introjected) V. achieving/becoming identities concerning (a)sexuality(ies) and gender(s). For the ascribed side, we have read Katz (invention of heterosexuality), Fausto-Sterling and Kessler (intersex people), Foucault (history of sexuality), Hazard (uterus), Creighton et al. (hegemonic masculinities), Santos and Santos (disabled women’s sexualities), Briggs and Davis (reproductive politics). In regards to the achieving/becoming side, we have read brown (pleasure politics), Lopez (Ni Una Menos), Butler (gender performativity), Hill Collins (Black queer sexual politics), Ahmed (killjoy), Nelson (eco-eroticism), Lorde (erotic power), TallBear (beyond settler-sexuality), Simpson (Indigenous bodies sovereignty). Build an essay around this fundamental tension within human (a)sexuality. Use at least two readings from each side to reflect on the (inter)personal negotiations people go through when navigating (a)sexualities/genders social landscapes. Analyze one example from the documentaries/podcast/group activities we did in class to support the case made. Or, 2. Throughout the term, we deconstructed ideas and practices around “normal,” given, fixed, “natural” (a)sexuality(ies) and gender(s) in the Canadian, US, Portuguese, and Argentine contexts. We also discussed authors that resist this normalizing landscape by expanding notions of the erotic and desire: Ahmed (killjoy), Lorde (erotic power), Sherrer (asexual desires), Nelson (carnal knowledge), Santos and Santos (disabled women’s sexualities), TallBear (making love and relations), brown (pleasure politics), Simpson (Indigenous sovereignty). Using at least two of these concepts/ideas, develop an essay in which you reflect on ways to disrupt and destabilize standardized ideas and practices around (a)sexualities/genders. Analyze two examples from class materials (lectures, readings, videos, podcasts, group activities) to support your argument. Or, 3. We began the term with Kim TallBear’s lecture on “decolonial sex and relations for a more sustainable world” and finished it with her call for “making love and relationships beyond settler sexuality.” In these two works, there is a thread of (a)sexualities/genders as both a weapon against Indigenous peoples (heteropatriarchy, settler-sexuality, marriage fortress) and a practice of dissidence, refusal, and freedom (ethical non-monogamy, kin-making, and land-based relationships with more-than-humans). Based on TallBear’s reading/lecture, and connecting these ideas with issues discussed throughout the term, write an essay in which you can show the complex and contradictory connections between (a)sexualities/genders as hurting/wounding or as healing/caring. Connect your main argument with discussions about consent and relationships (Week 8). Analyze two examples from class materials (lectures, readings, videos, podcasts, or group activities) to support your argument. [If you answer this question, you cannot answer Part 1. Q2]
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help