Study Guides (238,471)
Canada (115,151)
York University (9,811)
SOSC 1350 (66)

Final Exam Question #2.docx

2 Pages
Unlock Document

York University
Social Science
SOSC 1350
Julie Dowsett

Exam review #2 By: Angelica Lu Question : “In Canada, women and men who are white, heterosexual, able-bodied and middle-class are taken for „normal.‟ Yet, „normalcy‟ assumes a state of „deviancy‟ against which difference can be marginalized and stigmatized. Discuss how the law can be implicated in the social construction of „normalcy‟ and „deviance,‟ specifically focusing on heteronormativity and reproduction. In your answer, refer to family law, eugenics, and women‟s control over their reproductive capacities.” Introduction : Men and women who are white, heterosexual, able-bodied and middle class are considered to be “normal” solely because they are white. Ethnicities of colour are seen as deviant because they do not have “white” skin, therefore are seen to be insignificant to receive any type of right, which consequently means that they are marginalized and stigmatized by society and Canadian law. The laws can implicated in the social construction of “normalcy” and “deviance” indicates whether individuals are fit to have privileged rights because they are white or to be discriminated against because they have coloured skin. Thesis : Consequently, heteronormativity and reproduction are what determines who is “normal” and who is “deviant” because being “straight” is institutionally and idealistic in society, the eugenics movement has determined what is the “superior race” and women‟s control over their reproductive capacities. Paragraph 1 : Basically, this ideology of heteronormativity is the fact that society views straight white males to be superior to others because they are “white” and it is “normal” associate that “superiority” to “white” males. These ideologies essentially are the main reason why society has a problem with the idea of “homosexuality” since it is “abnormal” or “unnatural” Examples : In 1999, there was a case between M. v. H. where M was economically depended on H for 10 years. H had been the breadwinner and M was taking care of household chores. On top of that, M and H were lesbians, in this case, if M and H were heterosexual, M would have got some money but didn‟t because she did not fit into the ideology of heteronormativity. It represents how contemporary law still remains to be heteronormative regardless if the laws are suppose to be gender neutral. Paragraph 2
More Less

Related notes for SOSC 1350

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.