Love Sex and Intimacy Discussion

Love Sex and Intimacy Discussion

Instructions

Love Sex and Intimacy Discussion

Read the class materials and answer the discussion questions

the response can be several sentences for each question

3/31’s reading:

Quarmby, “Disabled and Fighting for a Sex Life”

Moore, “What It’s Really Like to Tinder Date When You’re Disabled”

Burke, “How Dating Works When You’re Living with Blindness”

In addition to today’s readings, please screen The Undateables, a British television reality TV show that pairs disabled and neuro-atypical people with one another. The show may be found .

You should follow the story of Richard (Aspberger’s) and Penny (wheelchair). You may skip the segments about Luke (Tourette’s) if you prefer. It should take you about 30 mins.

Please note that the show deals with dating, sex, and other mature themes. There is some cursing, especially if you choose to watch Luke’s segments. The readings for this week also deal with sex and identity.

1. Based on the Quarmby reading, what are some common stereotypes surrounding disabled people with regard to love, sex, and intimacy? Please provide a media example to illustrate you point.
2. Did the Burke and Moore confirm or challenge stereotypes about the love lives of disabled people? What surprised you about those readings?
3. Compare and contrast Molly or Kristin’s experiences with either Richard or Penny on The Undateables. What similarities do you see in terms of the challenges they face and their responses? What differences?
4. The Undatables is a British television show. Do you think the show would be accepted by American audiences as is? What would have to change about it?

4/2’s reading:

Shadel, “A queer user’s guide to the wild and terrifying world of LGBTQ dating apps”

Ohara, “Looking for love on Tinder? Lesbians must first swipe past a parade of straight men”

Riotta, “Tinder still banning transgender people despite pledge of inclusivity”

l

1. Based on the readings for 4/2, identify two or three limitation of dating apps for LGBTQ users.
2. How does the technology behind dating apps contribute to the limitations?
3. Take around 10 minutes to play. Then compare what you learn from the game to the readings. (If, after playing Monster Mash, you want to learn more about the game, click here: 
4. Do you think identity-specific apps (for instance, Jewish apps, gay apps, lesbian apps, apps for Asian people, etc.) might solve some of the problems the readings identify, or might they create more problems than they solve?

Both:

1. (described in first 2 mins) and categorization play a big role in how dating apps work. What are some benefits and drawbacks of these processes?
2. What is one way the readings for this week shaped your views about the representation of love, sex and intimacy in the media?

Love Sex and Intimacy Discussion

RUBRIC
Excellent Quality 95-100%	Introduction 45-41 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.		Literature Support 91-84  points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.			Methodology 58-53 points Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score 50-85%	40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.		83-76  points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.			52-49  points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality 0-45%	37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.		75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.			48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow

 

PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!