Herdt, G. (2004). Sexual development, social oppression, and local culture. Sexuality Research & Social Policy, 1(1), 39-62. doi:10.1525/srsp.2004.1.1.39

One of the most contentious debates in the field of psychology today is the question of nature vs. nurture, or the extent to which biology influences personal psychology vs. cultural constructs. Although it has fallen out of favor somewhat, there is also the Freudian 'essentialist' argument, which suggests that certain mental models span across cultures. According to the article, "Sexual development, social oppression, and local culture," traditional theories of adolescent development have emphasized the importance of the individual, and focused upon the creation of an adult self as if it existed outside of culture in both the Freudian and biological discourses of psychology. Herdt (2004) conducts a review of Freudian and developmental psychology, to argue for a more culturally-informed understanding of the progression of adolescent development.

In the field, a philosophy of individualism has been privileged, and isolated adolescent development from the community. "Historically, sexuality research as well as policy have consistently emphasized the individual, not the culture, sometimes to the extent that it appeared as if people lived outside of time and space (Herdt 2004: 39-40). The discipline of developmental psychology and psychoanalysis) reduces "sexual desire, behavior, infection, and health were viewed as resulting from internal drives, and variably as signs of personal or moral weakness, biological fitness, or successful...

Herdt is particularly interested in understanding the profound effect that social oppression can have upon an adolescent's adolescent development. This is a particularly notable deficit regarding the impact that the unique nature female development, non-heterosexual desire and poverty can have upon shaping adolescent behavior.
This privileging of the individual in the field of psychology has its origins in Freudianism. Freud stressed the internal, trans-cultural nature of developmental conflicts such as the Oedipal and Electra Complexes. Adapters of Freud's theories such as Erik Erikson still emphasized the universality of the stages of conflict, even though Erikson deemphasized sexuality as the only shaping force in the development of the human personality. The Freudian, psychological model was questioned by the Margaret Mead's controversial conception of culturally-determined sexuality in Samoa. However, partially because of the discrediting and the limits of Mead's study, in popular culture, adolescent sexuality remains seen as hormonally driven and 'essential.'

Biological theories of development have somewhat replaced Freudian ones, says Herdt, but they are likewise essentialized: "a tendency in research about sexual orientation to sloppy and scientifically dubious thinking, resulting in a variety of special claims, for example, about the existence of a "gay brain'" without asking how 'gayness' is socially constructed (Herdt 2004: 42). Either way, these are 'grand narratives' that attempt all-encompassing explanations of how…