In Search of the Elusive Definition of Heterosexuality

[slipnslide]

In Search of the Elusive Definition of Heterosexuality (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/31/health/views/in-search-of-the-elusive-definition-of-heterosexuality.html?_r=3&smid=tw-nytimesscience&seid=auto)


Far more scientific firepower, in other words, has been directed at the brains, genes, hormones and general physiologic processes behind homosexual attraction, leaving heterosexuality like a silhouette, outlined only by what it is not.

[Long Duck Dong]

fantastic article cos it raises issues that most people do not even think about......

the mention of a male partner that is xy/xxy ..... or in simple terms, intersex ( aspects of both sexes ) yet their relationship is seen as heterosexual cos its a man and a woman......

it creates a situation where the person is in love with and attracted to a person that is both and neither male or female...... a situation where a heterosexual relationship is not actually a heterosexual relationship, nor is it a bisexual relationship......

we can call the lady pansexual or omnisexual but that implies that she is attracted to males / females/ trans / gay / les / gender undefined.....and is she.... as if we do that, many of the bisexuals that are attracted to trans people / intersex / lady boys are actually pansexual, not bisexual......

so what is heterosexuality and is it truly the predominating sexuality as we are led to believe.... or could it be that many people use the term in error in the same way we tend to do with other sexualities

[FunE1]

Thanks, Slip!

I've got a new book to add to my Kindle wish-list.

Interesting to learn that the term "heterosexual" is a 19th century construct. Makes one imagine how things might be different if such a term had not been made.

Should be an interesting read.

[LastGent]

If you're interested in the history of sexual orientation, FunE1, then I recommend "Same-Sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europe", by John Boswell. It is a scholarly work, with medieval texts written in the original Greek and Hebrew, with copious translation notes.
Basically, before sexual orientation was invented, sex was described as "something you do with someone else for whatever reason". It was just something fun to do. A modern phrase we use, "men who have sex with men" would be the closest thing to what the ancient Greeks thought.

[LastGent]

http://www.galva108.org/Tritiya_prakriti.html
Here is a link to a paper on the classical Indian view of what-came-before-sexual-orientation-was-invented.

[LastGent]

Another thing, regarding the bias in finding the 'gay' gene instead of the 'straight' gene, is that, if one does not know what the straight gene is, then how can one know what a gay gene looks like, not knowing what the differences are between the two? That is a problem with the "this hypothetical gene made me this way" camp.
We need to evolve to the state where having sex with whatever is warm and friendly is cool.