Difference between revisions of "426--Week 8 Questions/Comments--Tuesday"
From McClurken Wiki
(→Overarching Ideas) |
(→Chapter 2) |
||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
One of the things I found particularly interesting about Ch. 2 was the incorporation of science, specifically medicine, into the understanding of the damaging effects of “sexual excess.” I don’t think any of us were surprised by the relationship between inappropriate sexual acts and sin, but I found the incorporation of science to be very interesting. By listing physical ailments and symptoms as well as using empirical evidence (even if it is cited as weak by Walters) plus the role of physicians, advice manual writers were able to bring a justification to their concerns about sexual excess. I think by giving examples of physical ailments associated with this type of sexual deviance they were not only further pointing out the damages to the person, but even giving physical proof of the sin within these people. Even phrenologists used physical anatomy to attempt to better understand sexual excess, pointing to a larger desire for physical, scientific evidence of sexual deviance. –Mary Beth | One of the things I found particularly interesting about Ch. 2 was the incorporation of science, specifically medicine, into the understanding of the damaging effects of “sexual excess.” I don’t think any of us were surprised by the relationship between inappropriate sexual acts and sin, but I found the incorporation of science to be very interesting. By listing physical ailments and symptoms as well as using empirical evidence (even if it is cited as weak by Walters) plus the role of physicians, advice manual writers were able to bring a justification to their concerns about sexual excess. I think by giving examples of physical ailments associated with this type of sexual deviance they were not only further pointing out the damages to the person, but even giving physical proof of the sin within these people. Even phrenologists used physical anatomy to attempt to better understand sexual excess, pointing to a larger desire for physical, scientific evidence of sexual deviance. –Mary Beth | ||
| − | This is kind of a small point but I found it interesting reading about the Oneidas. They were the complete opposite of what these manuals were teaching and yet they still gained some what of a following. It was interesting to read that not everyone believed the extreme ideas about chastity during the time period. Not that I am endorsing the Oneidas at all (I think they are just crazy), but it was somewhat refreshing to read something other than "sex is bad". -- Kari W. | + | This is kind of a small point but I found it interesting reading about the Oneidas. They were the complete opposite of what these manuals were teaching and yet they still gained some what of a following. It was interesting to read that not everyone believed the extreme ideas about chastity during the time period. Not that I am endorsing the Oneidas at all (I think they are just crazy), but it was somewhat refreshing to read something other than "sex is bad". -- Kari W. |
| + | |||
| + | Elaborating on Mary Beth’s comments, it seems to me that this was the beginning of our modern approach to sex. Today’s parents, teachers, and church leaders often discourage the acts under pretenses of science as well as sin. As noted, this was a somewhat new idea. –Andrew B | ||
== Chapter 3 == | == Chapter 3 == | ||
