Although Western societies become more and more accepting towards the diversity of sexual preferences, a big part is still averse to and discriminatory against other sexual orientations than heterosexuality. One major cause for that is our current understanding of "sexual orientation". The purposes of my paper are to analyze why it promotes discrimination and to discuss how it could be changed, in order to reduce discrimination. Changing our understanding of "sexual orientation" from scratch seems promising, because it means creating a profound breeding ground for anti- discrimination protection and a more tolerant, inclusive and equality based kind of thinking.
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION
2. WHY OUR CURRENT UNDERSTANDING OF “SEXUAL ORIENTATION“ PROMOTES DISCRIMINATION
2.1 OUR CURRENT UNDERSTANDING OF “SEXUAL ORIENTATION“
2.2 THE REFERENCE TO THE OWN SEX PROMOTES DISCRIMINATION
2.3 THE RESTRICTION OF PREFERENCES TO ONE’S SEX PROMOTES DISCRIMINATION
3. HOW TO REDUCE DISCRIMINATION BY CHANGING OUR UNDERSTANDING OF “SEXUAL ORIENTATION“
3.1 RETAIN THE ELEMENT OF A PREFERENCE PATTERN
3.2 ELIMINATE THE REFERENCE TO THE OWN SEX
3.3 EXPAND THE SEXUAL ORIENTATION CATEGORIES
4. CONCLUSION
Objectives and Themes
This paper examines how the conventional societal understanding of "sexual orientation" contributes to systemic discrimination. The author argues that current definitions, which rely on the relation to one's own sex and restricted preference patterns, enforce cisnormativity and heteronormativity. The central objective is to propose an evolved, inclusive framework for defining sexual orientation that could dismantle these discriminatory structures while ensuring legal and social protection for diverse identity-based preferences.
- The role of sexual orientation definitions in promoting social and political discrimination.
- Critique of heteronormativity and the "same/opposite sex" binary in current terminology.
- The necessity of separating biological sex from sexual attraction and social identity.
- Proposing a new, identity-centered model for defining sexual orientation.
- Balancing anti-discrimination protection with the need for ethical boundaries in consensual relationships.
Excerpt from the Book
2.2 THE REFERENCE TO THE OWN SEX PROMOTES DISCRIMINATION
The categories of heterosexuality and homosexuality imply a reference to the own sex (Dembroff 2016: 2). This element is problematic, if we look at the objects of attraction: The idea of the same/opposite relation presupposes cisnormativity, i.e. that everyone can be clearly ascribed a sex at birth based on anatomical characteristics (Dembroff 2016: 2). But this is not that easy. The medical criteria for assigning a sex at birth are not even clearly determined (Haslanger 2016: 134 f.). This problem is especially salient considering hermaphrodites who have the genitals of a man and a woman at the same time. It probably happens that they are assigned a sex arbitrarily. Persons whose sex is not clearly visible are therefore discriminated, since they are excluded from being regarded as “normal“ objects of attraction, including further beliefs that they might not find a partner, create a family and “normally“ take part in society.
Furthermore, Western societies have developed the conviction of heteronormativity, i.e. heterosexuality should be socially and politically privileged (Dembroff 2016: 2). For example, in American countries only heterosexual monogamic spouses enjoy specific tax breaks and social security benefits. (Tweedy 2011: 1505 f.) But discrimination already takes place socially towards all those who don’t feel attracted to the opposite sex. In fact, not everybody wants to live in that kind of partnership or marriage, but prefers marrying someone of the same sex or maybe not marry at all. Since that kind of choice does not harm anybody, humans should have the personal liberty of choosing how and with whom they want to spend their lives - without having to suffer from receiving less rights.
Summary of Chapters
1. INTRODUCTION: The author introduces the problem of how current definitions of "sexual orientation" foster discrimination and outlines the intent to propose a more inclusive framework.
2. WHY OUR CURRENT UNDERSTANDING OF “SEXUAL ORIENTATION“ PROMOTES DISCRIMINATION: This section details how existing binary and sex-based understandings of orientation enforce heteronormativity and exclude diverse experiences.
2.1 OUR CURRENT UNDERSTANDING OF “SEXUAL ORIENTATION“: Explains the conventional reliance on "same/opposite" sex attraction patterns and their historical emergence.
2.2 THE REFERENCE TO THE OWN SEX PROMOTES DISCRIMINATION: Analyzes how the mandatory reference to one's own sex creates exclusion and marginalizes those who do not fit cisnormative categories.
2.3 THE RESTRICTION OF PREFERENCES TO ONE’S SEX PROMOTES DISCRIMINATION: Argues that limiting orientation to sex-based attraction ignores other valid forms of attraction and stigmatizes non-standard preferences.
3. HOW TO REDUCE DISCRIMINATION BY CHANGING OUR UNDERSTANDING OF “SEXUAL ORIENTATION“: Provides the author's proposal for reconstructing the concept to better align with identity and reduce discriminatory outcomes.
3.1 RETAIN THE ELEMENT OF A PREFERENCE PATTERN: Advocates for keeping the consistency of preferences as a key indicator, as it links orientation to an individual's core identity.
3.2 ELIMINATE THE REFERENCE TO THE OWN SEX: Proposes removing the binary "same/opposite" relation to eliminate the structural basis of heteronormativity.
3.3 EXPAND THE SEXUAL ORIENTATION CATEGORIES: Suggests a more inclusive model that recognizes varied sexual and gender-based attractions while maintaining ethical boundaries like consent.
4. CONCLUSION: Summarizes the core arguments and calls for the gradual integration of the revised definition into legal and educational systems.
Keywords
Sexual Orientation, Discrimination, Heteronormativity, Cisnormativity, Identity, Preference Pattern, Sex Discrimination, Same-Sex Marriage, Consent, Social Exclusion, Gender, Ontology, Human Rights, Inclusivity, Legal Protection.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research paper?
The paper explores how the traditional and current understanding of "sexual orientation" acts as a catalyst for discrimination and how redefining it can promote a more inclusive society.
What are the primary themes discussed in the work?
Key themes include the critique of heteronormativity and cisnormativity, the relationship between identity and preference, the ethics of consent, and the legal implications of sexual orientation terminology.
What is the author's main objective?
The objective is to propose a revised, more flexible understanding of sexual orientation that removes the focus on "same" or "opposite" sex, thereby reducing systemic discrimination.
Which methodology is employed in this paper?
The author uses a philosophical and ontological analysis to deconstruct current definitions of sexual orientation, drawing on existing scholarly work to identify the problematic elements of these definitions.
What topics are covered in the main body of the text?
The main body critiques the binary nature of current sexual orientation categories, discusses the impact of linking orientation to biological sex, and proposes a new model centered on consistent identity and consensual attraction.
Which keywords best describe this work?
Sexual Orientation, Discrimination, Heteronormativity, Cisnormativity, Identity, and Inclusivity.
How does the author propose to handle potential harmful preferences?
The author suggests that a new definition of sexual orientation should only protect preferences where the object(s) of attraction provide consent during the actual sexual practice.
What role does the "reference to the own sex" play in discrimination according to the text?
It creates a same/opposite relation that forces a cisnormative and heteronormative standard, which inherently discriminates against those who do not fit into these binary categories.
Why does the author argue that "preference patterns" should be retained?
The author argues that these patterns are embedded in an individual's identity, providing a strong basis for justifying legal protection against discrimination.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Andjelika Eissing-Patenova (Autor:in), 2020, Our understanding of "Sexual Orientation", München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/536748
