What could Paul have meant by ‘against nature’ (παρὰ φύσιν) as written in Romans 1:26? Striving for the well-being and health of all people

The point of departure of this article is postmodern philosopher Michel Foucault’s ‘archaeological analysis’ of the history of sexuality, seen from the lens of the South African philosopher Johann Beukes. Foucault points out that since the circulation of the so-called handbooks on penance in the 6th century CE, same-gender sex was seen as a punishable sin. With regard to perspectives before this period, Foucault reflects specifically on the contribution of the Christian theologian Augustine (354–430 CE), and particularly Augustine’s interpretation of the Greek expression para phusin (παρὰ φύσιν) as ‘against nature’ as written in Paul’s letter to the Romans (1:26). He argues that this interpretation by Augustine represents a trend in contemporaneous thinking of non-Christian writers such as Plutarch and Themistios. The aim of this article is to demonstrate that a much more influential stimulus from another non-Christian thinker, namely Artemidorus of Daldis (2nd century CE), created a common context that influenced Augustine’s views and subsequently those on same-gender sex, sexual identity, and heterosexual marriage within the Christian tradition.Contribution: The article shows how modern-day homophobia and aversion in same-gender sex do not have its primarily ground in Paul’s use of para phusin, but that Augustine and present-day homophobes in the Christian (including the Reformed) tradition do have their roots in a non-Christian conviction without realising its intercultural and non-Christian origins.

Are women always better able to recognize faces? The unveiling role of exposure time

A longer exposure time generally improves individuals’ ability to recognize faces. The current research investigates whether this effect varies between genders and whether it is influenced by the gender of the exposed faces. Based on a set of four experimental studies, we advance our knowledge of face recognition, gender, gender distribution of exposed faces, and exposure time in three main ways. First, the results reveal that women are more likely than men to suffer from a decrease in face recognition ability due to a lower exposure time. Second, the findings show that when exposure time is short (vs. long) women recognize a larger proportion of same gender faces and also recognize a larger proportion of same gender faces as compared with the proportion of same gender faces recognized by men. Third, findings reveal that when individuals are only exposed to same gender faces, women recognize more faces than men regardless whether exposure time is short, or long. In short, the findings of this research suggest that insight into the interplay between gender and exposure time length is critical to appropriately determine human beings’ ability to recognize faces.

Love and Gender

The chapter offers a relational-sociological account of gender, romantic love, and personal relationships. It conceptualizes gender as a social category that prescribes particular kinds of social relationships within and between genders. Traditionally, friends are supposed to be of the same gender, whereas romantic love has long been reserved for heterosexual relationships. Friendships connect transitively to form cliques, whereas romantic love is exclusively dyadic. Romantic love and gender, but also friendship and family, are cultural models (institutions) that bring order into personal relationships. They make for patterns of structural equivalence, with different patterns by type of relationship. The statistical analysis of confiding relations in the 2004 U.S. General Social Survey shows them to be remarkably gendered. Close personal ties to friends, neighbors, and even siblings run predominantly to members of the same gender. Women maintain more family relations, and men confide more in work colleagues.

Tendency to laugh is a stable trait: Findings from a round-robin conversation study

Is the tendency to laugh a stable trait? What does the amount of laughter tell us about the personality and state of the producer, and how does their laughter influence the people around them? To answer these questions, we used a round-robin design where participants (N=66) engaged in 10 different conversations with 10 same-gender strangers. This design allowed us to determine state- and trait-level differences in how much people laugh and to isolate different sources of variability in the amount of laughter per conversation. More than half of the variability in the amount a person laughs is attributable to individual differences. This tendency to laugh negatively predicts conversation enjoyment. A smaller amount of variability in the amount people laugh is due to qualities of their conversation partners. Partners who tend to elicit others’ laughter are perceived as more relatable. We examined the personality correlates of laughter and found that less intellectual and less empathically-concerned participants (i.e., nonserious participants) produced and elicited more laughter. In summary, how much a person laughs is not a straightforward function of enjoyment. Instead, it is a behavioral trait associated with being perceived as relatable, supporting laughters’ proposed function of conveying harmless, nonserious intentions.

Are Politicians More Responsive Towards Men’s or Women’s Service Delivery Requests? A Survey Experiment with Ugandan Politicians

This study examines whether politicians exhibit gender bias in responsiveness to constituents’ requests for public service delivery improvements in Uganda. We leverage an in-person survey experiment conducted with 333 subnational politicians, of which one-third are elected to women’s reserved seats. Politicians hear two constituents request improvements in staff absenteeism in their local school and health clinic and must decide how to allocate a fixed (hypothetical) budget between the two improvements. The voices of the citizens are randomly assigned to be (1) male-school, female-health or (2) female-school, male-health. We find no evidence of gender bias toward men versus women, or toward same-gender constituents. This study expands on the mixed results of prior studies examining gender bias in politician responsiveness (typically over email) by adding a critical new case: a low-income context with women’s reserved seats.