Joanna wrote:
> I know I've said this before and I apologize for being
boring, but the problem is not so much with sexuality as
it is with the desire for control, which makes us insist that
our sexual identity be one thing only and that it never
change.
Arash responded:
> I actually see the converse as a desire for control, to
insist that sexual orientation can be swayed just by mental
effort and social stimulation.
I am with Joanna on this one. While I have argued for a strategic use of essentialism (after all that is how straights got their privileges; time to let queers in on the gravy train. Quid pro quo Clarice.), I certainly have seen my sexuality morph over time, and clearly this transformation was in part due to my own efforts in this area. The biggest transformation occurred when I dated a pre-op FTM transexual: all my notions of sexuality/gender were short-circuited.
Arash again:
> I think that the position that sexual attraction is outside the
domain of choice and stable over a lifetime actually does testify
to the experience of many (not all) people and that, over just a
desire for control or certainty, explains it's popular currency.
I think while the existence of such a notion is explained by the fact that many people experience their sexuality this way, its dominance is more satisfactorily explained by the desire for control.
Brian Dauth Queer Buddhist Resister