1st Idea: I am a fan of Labels. More than just words to describe shared experience, to mark me as part of a community, I like having words to describe my personal experience, to provide me with a context for myself, and to help me understand how I relate to the world*. But one thing that fuckyeahasexual really holds to, and it is a sentiment held within and without the Ace community and maybe even the LGBTQ+ community, is the idea that in order to be useful, or even applicable, a label must be self chosen. This doesn't seem to revolutionary to me, but reading this post, it seems clear hat the self-chosen aspect of labels isn't as important universally. I'm just going to say that the self-chosen aspect of labeling seems pretty important to me, with the exception of fictional characters**.
2nd Idea: As a culture we have reified sexuality labels, for sometimes good reasons, we have taken abstract concepts and turned them into concrete identities (or tried to). The way I see it, sexual orientation labels are most helpful when they are descriptive and predictive - when they remain abstract and open to the confusing nature of life. The way I would phrase this understanding would be like this:
"I haven't experienced sexual attraction (descriptive), therefore, when planning for the future I will probably be most satisfied by exploring alternatives to the romantic/sexual path that is founded in sexual attraction (predictive)"
A straight woman might phrase it like this:
"In the past all of the sexual attraction I've felt has been towards men (descriptive), therefore when looking for a romantic/sexual partner I will probably be most satisfied by focusing my attentions on men (predictive)"
These models focus on using past experience as a means of predicting future but also allow for the complexity of sex and gender.
What we have done by reifying sexuality is we have changed the labels from this model to one that is definitive and restrictive. Under the reified model I would describe my sexuality like this:
"I have never felt sexual attraction, therefore I am asexual (definitive), therefore I cannot feel sexual attraction in the future without having to change the label that I use (restrictive)"
I think that this model is more harmful than helpful. The restrictions present in this model mean that anytime someone feels something outside of the limits of the label that they have chosen the foundations of something that they think is inextricably part of themselves are thrown into question. Questioning the foundations of your self is tiring to say the least, and after it happens once an uncertainty hangs over you like a dark cloud, threatening more upheaval. The abstract model doesn't have this uncertainty because it sees experiences outside the "definition" as additional descriptors that may be useful for future predictions.
My analysis of reification thus far has been fairly negative, and I stand by that, I think the abstract model is more accurate and nuanced, but here I want to point out the legitimate reasons that probably led to reification. Beyond the fact that people tend to naturally favor simplicity that abstract models don't lend themselves to, the concrete model of sexuality allows a more stable identity to emerge, and around that identity a more stable community can form, a more stable community can leverage more effectively for social and political standing. Reification and essentialization of sexuality have been important tools in the process of gaining political equality, but those gains have come at a cost.
These thoughts are just based on some gut feelings and a couple of conversations, so I'm sure there are things I simplified or missed, so please let me know if you have any thoughts!
*As an aside, this is part of why I'm so frustrated with being unable to get a firm grip on my romantic orientation. I know there's this way of describing how I want to relate to the world, and to other people, but I can't find a decent definition of romantic attraction (which isn't surprising, it's the romantic version of the invisible elephant) so I have the choice, essentially of an array of different options based on whatever definition I choose (Aromantic, Demiromantic, Biromantic, Heteromantic) but this wasn't supposed to be a post about my frustrations with myself so I'll move on.
**I could caveat that statement farther, but that might be worthy of a post by itself.
No comments:
Post a Comment