SamplesAnalysisEthical Issues in Madonna's SexBuy essay
← Variance Analysis for Clinical PathwaysQuote Analysis →

Custom Ethical Issues in Madonna's Sex Essay

Madonna has been at the helm of most music productions across the globe. Most of these pieces touch upon social issues relating to the contemporary society. Specifically, her music videos often touch topics bordering on female sexuality and male dominance. She has produced several music pieces that touch upon very important life scenarios ranging from the ones that are accepted in the society to those that are not recognized by several societies in the world. Some of her works include Human Nature, Like a Prayer, Like a Virgin, and Justify my Love among others. She has also published some books like Erotica and sex, which is the bone of contention in this paper. In other words, this paper will concentrate on issues underlying the book of Sex by Madonna.

The stage performance of this book Sex was directed by Jean Baptiste Mondino. The appearance of the video in the form of latex and leather symbolizes the constraints and confusions in the current society. The genre for this song is pop and it could also take the RnB. All in all, it does not meet the requirements of the pop video. It is based on the advocation of the sexual expression, which will cut across all sexual inclinations from the straight relationships down to the cases of gays and lesbians in the society. She constantly refers to the statement ‘Express yourself, don’t repress you.’ She does not even apologize even if she is pressed by the public to relinquish the acts she has been performing, but claims that these are meant to teach the public some morals in the society. She says “these are not meant to encourage the society to practice these acts in their immediate environments.”

This piece of work is considered as monochrome and is set in a minimalistic approach. It is very clear and explained in simple white and black with no hidden issues at all. The movie is very simple and does not use any exotic colors that are very bright in nature with some flashing lights and creative backgrounds. This simplicity makes it less effective and is quite ground-breaking at the time swell. This shows that Madonna is an artist who is not afraid to push issues to the boundaries. She says “she is not the only one with some form of opinion.”

According to the U.S. Census Bureau information, the number of children who are living with gay couples has increased since 2000. The capacity of adoption is unclear; however, there is the appearance of a little cohort of gay couple friendly natural parents, which has escalated that amount. Homophobia has risen past argument, which does not impact them. These concurrent birth gay couples consider domestic relationship as quality, financial security, and stability. However Madonna claims “If one is a gay and wishes to adopt regardless of his or her status, the fact whether he/she is either single or in a gay couple matters a lot.” Ironically, people who tend to urge that children require a two-parent home do not enlarge it to gay couples.

 A number of nations that allow gay couples adoption have almost tripled in the past six years. Mississippi and Utah alone can outlaw gay adoption because Florida’s limitation was proved unconstitutional. All the other states in the United States allow gay couple adoption. Legal landscape is still changing, especially in favor of gay couple adoption. California, Arkansas, Colorado, Illinois, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, District of Columbia, and Vermont allow gay couple stepparents adoption of their partners’ toddlers. Apart from Pennsylvania, those named states allow all other gay couples adoption, as do Iowa, Indiana, Maine, New Hampshire, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, and Vermont. North Dakota, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Mississippi, New Hampshire, and Ohio particularly discriminate it. In some other states, judges are the ones to decide on the bias of a case-by-case review. In such states, “one might have to spend the articulate of the procedures even before you are aware if you can adopt a child or not”.

Definitive researches are required that would go after huge numbers of infants over an extended period. This would determine reliable data on gay couple parenting and the impacts, if any, on children. Nowadays, researches are opposing and can be influenced by organizations and individuals that sponsor the study. Studies associated with conservative religion and groups often indicate negative impacts on children from gay homes. Researchers who sustain gay couple parenting are usually blamed for being influenced for their supporting gay couple rights. Gay couples who are willing to obtain a family usually turn to adoption and foster care as the means to have children in their homes. In 2010, the National Resource Center for Permanency and Family Connections retains that 5% of adopted infants and 4% of foster infants in America are living with gay couple parents. However, some gay couples still face difficulties.

The law also plays an important role in this issue. In some countries, certain states regulations curtail gay couple’s rights to foster or adopt children. However, these restrictive laws are being highly overturned. For example, Florida started admitting gay couples to foster and adopt children in November 2008. Adoption regulations concerning adoptions by gay couple partners also vary. Foster care and adoption applications usually have a vocabulary that is unfriendly to gay couples. As an indication, forms should indicate Parent 1 and Parent 2 instead of the gender terms concerning father and mother. The foster care and adoption process usually includes a homeland visit and analysis of the parents' capabilities to bring up babies well. Even in the states with regulations that limit discrimination, gay couples may still fail assessment for enigmatic reasons.

A research study conducted by the Georgia State University College of Law indicates that about a quarter of children living with gay couples in America have been adopted. Regardless many gay couples who have managed to adopt, difficulties of adoption are still in place in various states. Sexual direction does not form a federally defended class in the way that ethnicity and race do.

Children of heterosexual parents are commonly biologically associated to at least one of the parents. As various states recognize gay couple marriage, such states' laws have developed more defenses for the descent of the non-biological parents. It is very important to determine parental rights as it helps in deciding custody matters in the few instances of divorce. Since federal law still has not recognized gay couple marriage, their rights are decided at the state level and vary greatly. A vital achievement was recognized in January 2012 when the Iowa court agreed that identities of both married gay couple parents should be recorded in the children’s birth certificate.

In other states, non-biological gay couple parent adopts and becomes the lawfully recognized parent of the children. In some states, where gay couple marriage is illegal, the permissible rights of the non-biological gay couple parents are delicate. According to the Keen “News Service, Carolina judge prevented a second gay couple parent adoption in the year 2010.” Same cases have exploded throughout the nation. Without the hindrance exacted by marriage, rights of many gay couple parents are still at the compassion of the impulse of the judge.

Nonetheless, endless societal stigmas that are related to adoption by gay couples remain, just as institutional barriers do. These obstructions do not bear the better well-being of children; in fact, they delay or prevent permanency for the majority, discouraging their long-season academic and psychosocial adjustment. Over 10, 000 children are continuing to live in foster care, despite the fact that they are being lawfully freed and ready for adoption. Great efforts must be incurred in order to strategize permanent and timely homes for them.  As well, this should be expanded to include all similar cases of other children abroad and inside our nation, who would benefit from adoption.

To make the most out of the number of appropriate trained available and vetted families for the needy children who require them, all parents should be treated regardless their race, gender, marital status, sexual, and/or income level orientation. All should be offered equal chances to apply and thereafter be determined for the adoptive parenthood they possess by the use of similar guidelines and standards. The majority of embracing professionals nowadays openly concur that they have been already accepting applications from gay applicants. Though, many, if not the majority, admit that they become uncertain about the most appropriate means of handling such few clients.

Great efforts to come up with comprehensive well-articulated clinical practices and social casework in relation to non-heterosexual homes, which begins with a requirement assessment, include assessing the range to which gay couples adopt a child. The only answer to this fundamental query seems to be difficult to assess for a range of reasons. Initially, due to continuing stigma and prejudice in the society, not all parents in the subject are usually open to the others concerning their sexual direction. As an outcome, there are probably significant figures of men and women who would like to become a parent of, or even they are parenting, fostering or adopted children without recognizing themselves as gays.

Secondly, due to discriminatory practices and occurrences at various agencies, persons who are out of their survival means may not split information concerning their sexual direction once they are applying to become adoptive and foster parents. Thirdly, several children are being adopted by gay couple adults who usually were not asked explicitly of their sexual orientation. Several agencies including those that work together with gay couples do not maintain substantial statistics on the figures of children whom they place to non-heterosexual persons and couples. Finally, in secret national research, information concerning sexual direction usually is not taken. In short, concrete numbers on adoption by gay couples, inclusive of the kind of adoptions selection, are not available at the moment.

The approval of parenting and adoption by gay couples in America has been assisted by the case law and statutes of the prior decade. Such action, most presumably, has been facilitated by the substantive research by social scientists that have provided extremely positive ideas of such families. This drastic change is reproduced in raising public adoptions by homes headed by gay couples. Citing example, in 1995 most of the USA citizens (57%) opposed adoption by gay couples. By the year 2006, the number had decreased to about 48%. This change in attitudes came in all age categories, concerning both women and men in all parts of the nation. Sharply, persons under the age of thirty years were highly positive concerning gay couple adoption (58% in favor; 38% opposed) as compared with the older persons.

This suggests that the trend is in the direction of greater acceptance concerning this kind of family and promises to continue growing. In fact, the actual notion of a gay couple with babies as the family is currently being accepted by more than two thirds (68%) of the USA citizens. This is an increase from about 54% in 2003. The purpose of public’s support of gay couples’ family life is being mirrored and, perhaps, it is increasing partly since the professionals’ support is virtually present in every major U.S. mental health, medical, children welfare, and legal organization alarmed with the interests of the families and children. It has shown its bear for the gay adoption and parenting.

These are comprehensive, though they are not restricted by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Medical Association, American Psychiatric Association, Adolescent Psychiatry, American Academy of Child, Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, American Psychoanalytic Association, American Bar Association, American Psychological Association, National Association of Social Workers, North American Council on Adoptable Children and Child Welfare League of America.

Adoption victory rests in some parts on the utilization and availability of the most appropriate pre- and post-adoption activities. Given that, offspring in several kinds of adoption has varying requirements; the adult necessitates different kinds of support and preparation. Therefore, it is quite important to determine whether gay couples are most likely to foster and adopt children with specific qualities or from particular settings. Such vital information might assist professionals in developing more effective and efficient support and training for such categories of adoptive homes. As noted previously, public children, private agencies, and welfare agencies are focusing on special necessities. Adoptions are most likely to work together with gay couples.  They tend to adopt children who come from the hardest backgrounds and the ones with the most difficult behaviors. This research finding may assist in explaining the outcomes of other researches indicating that gay couples are more likely to adopt children who are faced with mental health and/or developmental problems than heterosexuals are. The point whether these kinds of adoption represent a real selection by gay couples or depict a prejudice practice is freely to question.

Various researches show that there was the past confrontation among various agencies to work together with the LBGT regulars, the propensity to counterpart those with offspring who are tough, have particular necessities, or are little favored as a form of adoption bias. Also, there are several evidences showing that gay couples are more usual to adopt crossways ethnic lines than heterosexual adults.

 Giving example, current research shows that gay pre-adoptive and post adoptive couples have articulated higher honesty to the notion of assuming an African-American child. In addition, information from several countries research has indicated most adoption of ethnic minority offspring between gay couples. Additionally, one study has indicated that gay couples are more likely to absolute transracial adopts than their counterparts. This was particularly real for inter-racial couples as compared to same racial couples. In explaining the matter of gays adopting ethnic minority offspring, various researchers agree that provided with their multiple marginal identities, these persons are exceptionally situated to comprehend and manage the difficulties linked with racial issues.

People should advocate for the removal of cultural and legal barriers for gay couples adoption with a specific aim of improving the prediction of waiting youth and children in the foster care. This entails encouragement of the support of gay marriage laws. This is because the social organization of marriage provides clear long-lasting psychological as well as many other benefits for children joint venture among LGBT organizations and adoption professionals, and it also promotes positive press advertisement of gay couple’s families.

In order to crown up issues in this paper, it is quite clear that in each and every year, more than 130,000 children are being adopted in the United States of America by married gay couples; by adults of various ethnicity and color, by financially stable parents, and even by the ones with inadequate incomes; by organic family strangers and members; by persons who have tussled with infertility, and even the ones who can bear babies, but selected this course instead; and by families where biological children already exist, and even by the ones where do not exist. All the same, majority of the adoptive parents are gay couples.

Code: Sample20

Related essays

  1. Quote Analysis
  2. Venus, Cupid, Folly and Time
  3. Variance Analysis for Clinical Pathways
  4. Palestine and Palestinians
X
 
On your first order you will receive 15% discount
Order now PRICES from $12.99/page ×
call-back-button
live-chat-button
Live chat