I think one of the things that holds us back from talking about sexuality being socially constructed is the fear that it will come across as saying that LGBTQIA+ identities specifically are *fake* because straightness is allowed to stand on its own as this unshakable category that is forever *real*, when actually, straightness is just as socially constructed as queerness. (I'm sure you know this, just feels worth saying.) I also think a lot people imagine a society with no sexuality labels as a society where everyone is straight, because straightness is treated a default, but that's not what that society would look like at all. It feels similar to how conservative people sometimes end up saying that they don't have pronouns or don't have a gender, because they perceive being cis as a non-identity, a category so neutral is doesn't need a name, when if fact saying you don't have a gender and don't use pronouns is a much more queer position! Anyways, thanks for this thoughtful piece. I'm very interested to see this conversation expand!
I think you touch on something really interesting and I also think many people fear the «removal» of sexuality the way they fear the «removal» of gender whenever the gender binary is challenged. I think often the opposite of what you say is also true, many straight and conservative people have this idea that if we remove all sexual identity (just as adding more different options sometimes provoke) we will all be some ambiguous sexual predator who can’t know who we are or who we want to have sex with. Probably resulting in everyone wanting sex with everyone. I believe a lot of their fear is for their own identity to be attacked and compromised. Because how can someone identify as straight if sexuality doesn’t even really «exist»? So many cling to the normative identity because going outside the norm will mean a total deconstruction of their whole life/world/self view. It will feel like total loss of identity and everything you understand about the world. As someone who has had to go through this to accept myself as a trans nonbinary person (plus so much else), I can understand where that fear comes from, even if I don’t support acting on it the way many do.
My point being, I both agree with what you say and I also think the opposite is true at the same time. Sexuality as a social concept and possibly «nonexistent» as set categories and identity markers becomes a huge threat to someone whose whole identity is based on keeping within tight normative labels. It is a relief to see oneself as the «norm» and if the norm isn’t really that «real» one risks losing one’s whole foundation.
I'm not asexual bc I chose to reject sexuality. I'm asexual bc sexually was already moot. The work you are doing here to try to imagine this other paradigm is the paradigm I naturally inhabit.
I have always missed most innuendo bc my brain just doesn't have reason to register it. Even in my more anthropological curiosity to try to figure out what everyone else is making such a huge fuss about and learning to recognize more references, I still naturally miss many. I know this by context clues of the reactions of others. Sometimes I figure it out after the fact. Many times I just don't see it worth my energy.
To me, the world is sex obsessed and I can't comprehend why when it so obviously causes so many avoidable complications. What the world calls love is largely lust. And these seem to combine to devalue human connectedness that leaves everyone generally isolated.
I guess I'm glad that your course studies are guiding people to see the world I've always seen. Maybe it will become less lonely over here.
This is such an interesting response. I am allo/demisexual, but alloromantic and aplatonic (and autistic). I can relate to how you describe your natural way of seeing the world and finally someone else can maybe see it too, even if I see the world very differently from you. I feel similarly about many other things and I find so much pleasure in learning about how others view the world. I think we are all better off to learn from the less normative people. Only by learning about asexuality I have been more aware of my own sexuality, how I relate relationally as polyamorous and aplatonic. To deconstruct the whole idea of sexuality like this further helps me see myself and society in new ways, even if it will never be how I exist naturally, it will still help me communicate and relate in new and interesting ways, building safer and closer relationships the way they feel good to me and at the same time respect others’ different ways of relating too.
Such fascinating information each week. Discussion of the social construction of sexuality always reminds me of a 1991 article "Anthropology Rediscovers Sexuality: A Theoretical Comment" that notes that some people even hold the position that the physiological mechanisms of sexual responses (for those who have them, we could add) are also socially constructed.
I just read another Substack article this morning by @leikeliscomet which talks about asexuality as a rejection of hegemonic sex and sexuality. Both the article above and the article I am linking below are well worth the reads.
This is so interesting, I’ve never heard of the concept but it does feel similar to comp het in a lot of ways. Conversations around sexuality tend to start from who/what you’re attracted to instead of if!
I think one of the things that holds us back from talking about sexuality being socially constructed is the fear that it will come across as saying that LGBTQIA+ identities specifically are *fake* because straightness is allowed to stand on its own as this unshakable category that is forever *real*, when actually, straightness is just as socially constructed as queerness. (I'm sure you know this, just feels worth saying.) I also think a lot people imagine a society with no sexuality labels as a society where everyone is straight, because straightness is treated a default, but that's not what that society would look like at all. It feels similar to how conservative people sometimes end up saying that they don't have pronouns or don't have a gender, because they perceive being cis as a non-identity, a category so neutral is doesn't need a name, when if fact saying you don't have a gender and don't use pronouns is a much more queer position! Anyways, thanks for this thoughtful piece. I'm very interested to see this conversation expand!
I think you touch on something really interesting and I also think many people fear the «removal» of sexuality the way they fear the «removal» of gender whenever the gender binary is challenged. I think often the opposite of what you say is also true, many straight and conservative people have this idea that if we remove all sexual identity (just as adding more different options sometimes provoke) we will all be some ambiguous sexual predator who can’t know who we are or who we want to have sex with. Probably resulting in everyone wanting sex with everyone. I believe a lot of their fear is for their own identity to be attacked and compromised. Because how can someone identify as straight if sexuality doesn’t even really «exist»? So many cling to the normative identity because going outside the norm will mean a total deconstruction of their whole life/world/self view. It will feel like total loss of identity and everything you understand about the world. As someone who has had to go through this to accept myself as a trans nonbinary person (plus so much else), I can understand where that fear comes from, even if I don’t support acting on it the way many do.
My point being, I both agree with what you say and I also think the opposite is true at the same time. Sexuality as a social concept and possibly «nonexistent» as set categories and identity markers becomes a huge threat to someone whose whole identity is based on keeping within tight normative labels. It is a relief to see oneself as the «norm» and if the norm isn’t really that «real» one risks losing one’s whole foundation.
I'm not asexual bc I chose to reject sexuality. I'm asexual bc sexually was already moot. The work you are doing here to try to imagine this other paradigm is the paradigm I naturally inhabit.
I have always missed most innuendo bc my brain just doesn't have reason to register it. Even in my more anthropological curiosity to try to figure out what everyone else is making such a huge fuss about and learning to recognize more references, I still naturally miss many. I know this by context clues of the reactions of others. Sometimes I figure it out after the fact. Many times I just don't see it worth my energy.
To me, the world is sex obsessed and I can't comprehend why when it so obviously causes so many avoidable complications. What the world calls love is largely lust. And these seem to combine to devalue human connectedness that leaves everyone generally isolated.
I guess I'm glad that your course studies are guiding people to see the world I've always seen. Maybe it will become less lonely over here.
This is such an interesting response. I am allo/demisexual, but alloromantic and aplatonic (and autistic). I can relate to how you describe your natural way of seeing the world and finally someone else can maybe see it too, even if I see the world very differently from you. I feel similarly about many other things and I find so much pleasure in learning about how others view the world. I think we are all better off to learn from the less normative people. Only by learning about asexuality I have been more aware of my own sexuality, how I relate relationally as polyamorous and aplatonic. To deconstruct the whole idea of sexuality like this further helps me see myself and society in new ways, even if it will never be how I exist naturally, it will still help me communicate and relate in new and interesting ways, building safer and closer relationships the way they feel good to me and at the same time respect others’ different ways of relating too.
Such fascinating information each week. Discussion of the social construction of sexuality always reminds me of a 1991 article "Anthropology Rediscovers Sexuality: A Theoretical Comment" that notes that some people even hold the position that the physiological mechanisms of sexual responses (for those who have them, we could add) are also socially constructed.
It’s both for me 💜🤍
I just read another Substack article this morning by @leikeliscomet which talks about asexuality as a rejection of hegemonic sex and sexuality. Both the article above and the article I am linking below are well worth the reads.
https://leikeliscomet.substack.com/p/the-boredom-of-sexuality
This is so interesting, I’ve never heard of the concept but it does feel similar to comp het in a lot of ways. Conversations around sexuality tend to start from who/what you’re attracted to instead of if!