I retracted my Sexual Manifesto not too long ago, conceding that abolishing the faulty classifications of sexualities (LGB) would, in our society, ultimately put people back in the closet and impede the LGBT movement.
But I am once again deliberating the matter because the categories of LGB posit essential men and women themselves--a "reality" which I believe is based on social constructions, not biological fact.
The category bisexuality in particular posits two sexes, presumably in opposition to one another. This, we all know (or should know), is crap.
Then again, if people are sexually attracted to constructions of specific types of people, I suppose it is fitting to have classifications that describe such. But in so far as these classifications perpetuate conflations between sex and gender, essentialist male and female typologies, and rigid slots of sexual orientation--will any greater understanding be achieving?
I guess the idea of the butch-femme lesbian couple teases apart sex and gender. Mayve the transvestite does as well.
Perhaps these are justices that only the pansexual and sapiosexual can achieve.
But that just brings me back to the point of my manifesto--can't we all just be sexual? What is with object-based differentiation and classification?
If we say nothing, that only aids compulsory heterosexuality and social institutions predicated on such.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment