2/7/01: Hi all,
I have recently joined the list and I suppose it is time to introduce myself. It is a good excuse to procrastinate on all the other things I should be working on at the moment. I found out about the existence of this list when Gayle sent me a flattering e-mail message about an essay of mine which [s/he] had discovered on the web (http://moebius.psy.ed.ac.uk/~heckert/MSc.html). Thanks for the message, by the way, Gayle. It is always great to get positive feedback! How did you stumble across it?
I joined the list out of curiosity.
I am a sociology PhD student at the University of Edinburgh (Scotland). I'm doing my research on identity politics (including LGBT politics) and their limitations. I'm also an activist, organising a group to promote discussion of sexuality called Intercourse (http://www.intercourse.org.uk). Perhaps best of all, I get paid to talk about sex. I'm employed to do sex education sessions in Edinburgh high schools.
I have to admit, I'm rather critical of the queer by choice concept. At the same time, the idea of the gay gene (or that heterosexuality is natural) seems equally problematic. Following the discussion on this list and briefly looking at the information on the web site, it seems as though many of you think it must be one or the other. I would suggest that both of these concepts (choice or genetics) have something in common: they are both based on the idea that sexuality is a characteristic of the individual. I would offer an alternative—that sexuality is fundamentally social and not merely individual.
Sexuality is defined by social ideas and institutions. Even the concepts of heterosexuality and homosexuality (for example) are relatively recent historical inventions. (See The Invention of Heterosexuality by Jonathan Katz). Before these identities were defined by society (in this case the psychiatric profession), they could neither be chosen nor assumed to be natural. Sexual orientation is only one example of how society defines sexuality. Look at the ways in which sexuality is described/defined/represented in the media, in churches, by the governments, in schools, in families, when people actually have sex! These are social, not individual.
Right, I need to do some writing about pornography now. Intercourse will be discussing it tonight, my night class will be discussing it next week, and hopefully I can work it into a chapter I'm writing for a book on anarchism. :)
Cheers,
Jamie
http://moebius.psy.ed.ac.uk/~heckert/