Teen Sexuality Obstructions

Obstructions for Future Advocacy & Navigation Strategies Notably one of the obstacles that the UN still faces today when it comes to eliminating the various abuses based on gender identities and sexual orientation, can be characterized by cultures’ extreme disapproval of any sexual orientation or gender identity that opposes the perceived norm that is rationalized in the subjective name of protecting the purity of children (Joseph, 1994). The nature of this obstacle runs parallel to why within some cultures adolescent sexuality is feared. In Schalet’s (2004) article “Must we Fear Adolescent Sexuality”, she analyzes the boundaries of traditional religions’ infused morals that arguably inhibit sexual political liberation on the basis of the
Hubbard (2013) article “Kissing is Not a Universal Right: Sexuality, Law, and The Scales of Citizenship” analyzed how nationally recognized rights to sexual orientation doesn’t always translate into equal rights. Because legislation that outlaws homophobic discrimination typically fails to account for loopholes, a display of a same-sex kiss was removed from a licensed premise in the UK as the couple was bombarded with appeals to public orderliness reinforced by municipal law. This was possible because although, citizenship is recognized as the ‘right to have rights’, the association fostered between the individual, state, and community by definition asserts that the right cannot be extended to all (Aredt, 1986). Since citizenship is intrinsically an exclusionary concept, rights linked with citizenship are appropriately imbued with understandings of applicable identities (Isin, 2011). Furthermore, queer assessments have reasoned that this model citizen is ‘heterosexualised’, with particular rights of a person controlling their own life in addition to sexual autonomy is denied for any individual whose sexualities vary from the heterosexual ideal (Richardson, 1998; Bell and Binnie, 2002). One example of how moral panic continues to meddle in political affairs that enables the existence of various loopholes, is how the state removes rights away from individuals that are classified as “citizen-perverts”, as their existence and sexual inclinations fall outside culturally defined parameters of sexual orientations that are regarded as “healthy and holy”. As Bell (1995) explicitly states, “the figure of the citizen-pervert operates, then, as a constant reminder of the limits of the spaces of sexual citizenship; a figure tucked between the rigid notions of public and private,