Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
i'm confused. what you're saying seems obvious. binary thinking excludes a whole range of options in-between the terms (straight/gay for example). these exclusions have consequences some of which are felt quite acutely by folk. and there's no real need for that, in part because the binary thinking is itself so obviously limited and limiting.
|
What you're saying is only a secondary, and far less important problem with sexual orientation. And it's not perfectly valid either. If there is nothing wrong with the definition of 'homosexuality,' then there should be no other problem. It's not just a binary. There are three well-defined categories: Heterosexual, homosexual and bisexual.
The point is, the problem with 'homosexuality' is much more deep rooted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
what am i not seeing?
|
'Gender', as a distinct human trait from (outer-sex), which is an important part of our social identity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
what do you understand by valid?
|
Sexual Orientation is not 'valid' in the sense that:
(1) WRONG DEFINITION: The definition is faulty and incomplete (unless gender orientation is acknoweldged in the formal definition).
(2) NOT VIABLE: (i) It's impractical. It won't work. The non-effeminate guys will, for the most part, keep away from it, even when they all feel sexual towards men. That's because, its actually a gendered identity.
(ii) Also, in an environment where manhood is seen as equivalent to sexual desire for women, and where, a sexual desire for men is seen as pointing to a 'female soul' inside the male, how many males that are non-feminine and have an immense stake in manhood, will even consider acknowledging their sexual desires for men, however strong (or even exclusive) they are.
(3) WRONG MOTIVES: What is the motive for the western society to classify people on the basis of what is the outer sex of the person one is having sex with? Is it something that is useful to the individual? Not unless the individual is confusing his sexuality for men with his femininity. Fact is, no one experiences desires as identity. This classification only helps the society to control and check it amongst the 'normal' males. Like you would control a disease by isolating its virus. For the society with a strong Christian mentality, its a menace, a disease to be controlled.
The vested interests or the anti-man forces, are people or groups who are benefitted by the anti-man mechanisms that the society creates to control this 'disease' amongst men.
(3) WRONG OUTCOME: The results of dividing the society in terms of 'heterosexual,' 'homosexual' and 'bisexual' are totally inaccurate. It shows the majority as exclusively heterosexual which is simply put, false. Why do you think, such a small minority choose the 'bisexual' option?