DOCSLIB.ORG

Compulsory Sexuality

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Columbia Law School Scholarship Archive Faculty Scholarship Faculty Publications 2013 Compulsory Sexuality Elizabeth F. Emens Columbia Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, Disability Law Commons, Law and Gender Commons, Law and Philosophy Commons, and the Sexuality and the Law Commons Recommended Citation Elizabeth F. Emens, Compulsory Sexuality, STANFORD LAW REVIEW, VOL. 66, P. 303, 2014; COLUMBIA PUBLIC LAW RESEARCH PAPER NO. 13-331 (2013). Available at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/1786 This Working Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Publications at Scholarship Archive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Scholarship Archive. For more information, please contact [email protected]. COMPULSORY SEXUALITY Elizabeth F. Emens* Asexuality is an emerging identity category that challenges the common assumption that everyone is defined by some type of sexual attraction. Asexuals— those who report feeling no sexual attraction to others—constitute one percent of the population, according to one prominent study. In recent years, some individ- uals have begun to identify as asexual and to connect around their experiences interacting with a sexual society. Asexuality has also become a protected classifi- cation under the antidiscrimination law of one state and several localities, but le- gal scholarship has thus far neglected the subject. This Article introduces asexuality to the legal literature as a category of analysis, an object of empirical study, and a phenomenon of medical science. It then offers a close examination of the growing community of self-identified asexuals. Asexual identity has revealing intersections with the more familiar cat- egories of gender, sexual orientation, and disability, and inspires new models for understanding sexuality. * Isidor and Seville Sulzbacher Professor of Law, Columbia Law School. For help- ful conversations and comments on earlier drafts, I thank Susan Appleton, Noa Ben-Asher, Vera Bergelson, Christina Bohannan, Samuel Bray, Jessica Bulman-Pozen, Mark Carrigan, Mary Anne Case, Luis Chiesa, Jessica Clarke, Bridget Crawford, Ariela Dubler, Richard Emens, Katie Eyer, Lindsay Farmer, Robert Ferguson, Peter Fraenkel, Katherine Franke, Cary Franklin, Suzanne Goldberg, Sally Goldfarb, Timothy Gray, Alison Gurr, Bernard Har- court, Jill Hasday, Deborah Hellman, Adam Hickey, Bert Huang, Clare Huntington, Alan Hyde, David Jay, Margo Kaplan, Suzanne Kim, Sarah Lawsky, James Liebman, Kimberly Mutcherson, Elizabeth Povinelli, David Pozen, Anthea Roberts, Russell Robinson, Cliff Rosky, George Rutherglen, Elizabeth Scott, Rachel Smith, Geoffrey Stone, Lior Strahilevitz, Susan Sturm, Cass Sunstein, Emily Gold Waldman, and participants in the Association of Law, Culture, and Humanities Annual Conference at the University of London, Columbia Law School (CLS) Faculty Workshop, CLS Juniors Workshop, CLS Legal Scholarship Sem- inar, Columbia Law Women’s Association, Columbia University Institute for Research on Women and Gender Feminist Interventions Lecture Series, Emerging Family Law Scholars Conference, Fordham Legal Theory Workshop, Iowa Law School Faculty Workshop, Pace Law School Faculty Workshop, Rutgers School of Law-Camden Faculty Workshop, Rutgers School of Law-Newark Faculty Workshop, University of Miami School of Law Legal Theory Workshop, University of Minnesota Law School Faculty Workshop, University of Toronto Law School Legal Theory Workshop, and my employment discrimination law class. For excellent research assistance, I thank Anne Coxe, Justine di Giovanni, Timothy Gray, Johanna Hudgens, Maureen Kellett, Rachel Jones, Laura Mergenthal, Leigh Anne St. Charles-O’Brien, and Bahrad Sokhansanj. 303 Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2218783 304 STANFORD LAW REVIEW [Vol. 66:303 Thinking about asexuality also sheds light on our legal system. Ours is arguably a sexual law, predicated on the assumption that sex is important. This Article uses asexuality to develop a framework for identifying the ways that law privileges sexuality. Across various fields, these interactions include legal requirements of sexual activity, special carve-outs to shield sexuality from law, legal protections from others’ sexuality, and legal protections for sexual identity. Applying this framework, the Article traces several ways that our sexual law burdens, and occasionally benefits, asexuals. This Article concludes by closely examining asexuality’s prospects for broader inclusion into federal, state, and local antidiscrimination laws. INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................... 305 I. THE EMERGENCE OF ASEXUALITY .................................................................... 307 A. Conceptual: The Fourth Sexual Orientation .............................................. 308 B. Clinical: Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder ............................................ 309 C. Empirical: The One Percent Who Wants No One ...................................... 312 D. Self-Identified Aces Find Themselves and Each Other ............................... 314 II. MAPPING ASEXUAL IDENTITY .......................................................................... 316 A. Defining Asexuality as an Identity: Elements and Distinctions .................. 316 1. Principal elements ............................................................................... 316 a. Lack of attraction........................................................................... 316 b. Lack of choice ................................................................................ 318 2. Key distinctions ................................................................................... 319 a. Distinguishing sex with oneself from sex with other people .......... 319 b. Distinguishing romance from sex and friendship .......................... 321 c. Distinguishing aversion and indifference ...................................... 322 3. Identity in relation ............................................................................... 324 4. The problem of diversity ...................................................................... 326 5. Responding to the skepticism .............................................................. 328 B. Intersections: Comparing Identity Categories ........................................... 329 1. Sexuality .............................................................................................. 330 a. Homosexuality ............................................................................... 330 b. Bisexuality ..................................................................................... 330 c. Polyamory ...................................................................................... 332 d. No sexual orientation ..................................................................... 333 2. Gender ................................................................................................. 333 a. No gender ...................................................................................... 333 b. Very gendered ................................................................................ 334 3. Disability ............................................................................................. 337 a. Disability as asexuality .................................................................. 337 b. Asexuality as disability .................................................................. 337 C. Models: Minoritizing, Universalizing, Novel, or Umbrella Category ........ 338 1. Minoritizing ......................................................................................... 338 2. Universalizing ..................................................................................... 339 3. Something new .................................................................................... 340 a. Quantity axis .................................................................................. 340 b. Autoerotic axis ............................................................................... 341 Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2218783 February 2014] COMPULSORY SEXUALITY 305 c. Narcissism axis .............................................................................. 342 d. Romantic-attraction axis ............................................................... 343 e. Orientation-object axis .................................................................. 343 4. An umbrella category of orientation ................................................... 344 III. ASEXUAL LAW AND OUR SEXUAL LAW ........................................................... 345 A. Asexuality’s Interactions with Law: An Analytic Framework .................... 347 B. Legal Requirements of Sexual Activity ....................................................... 350 1. Marriage law ....................................................................................... 350 2. Looking beyond conjugality in marriage and its alternatives ............. 352 C. Legal Exceptions to Shield Sexuality .......................................................... 353 1. The sex work debates .........................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Robust Evidence for Bisexual Orientation Among Men

    Robust Evidence for Bisexual Orientation Among Men

    Robust evidence for bisexual orientation among men Jeremy Jabboura, Luke Holmesb, David Sylvac, Kevin J. Hsud, Theodore L. Semona, A. M. Rosenthala, Adam Safrone, Erlend Slettevoldb, Tuesday M. Watts-Overallf, Ritch C. Savin-Williamsg, John Syllah,i, Gerulf Riegerb,1, and J. Michael Baileya,1,2 aDepartment of Psychology, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208; bDepartment of Psychology, Essex University, Colchester CO4 3SQ, United Kingdom; cDepartment of Psychiatry, Kaiser Permanente, Los Angeles, CA 90056; dDepartment of Psychological and Social Sciences, Pennsylvania State University Abington, Abington, PA 19001; eKinsey Institute, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405; fSchool of Psychology, University of East London, Stratford E15 4LZ, United Kingdom; gDepartment of Psychology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853-4401; hAmerican Institute of Bisexuality, Los Angeles, CA 90014; and iUniversity of Chicago Law School, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637 Edited by Steven Pinker, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, and approved June 16, 2020 (received for review February 25, 2020) The question whether some men have a bisexual orientation— emotional biases of the questioners. Some heterosexual and ho- that is, whether they are substantially sexually aroused and mosexual men may find it relatively easy to understand each attracted to both sexes—has remained controversial among both other’s monosexuality because both have strong sexual attraction scientists and laypersons. Skeptics believe that male sexual orien- to one sex and virtually none to the other. For this reason, these tation can only be homosexual or heterosexual, and that bisexual men may have more difficulty accepting bisexuality as it challenges identification reflects nonsexual concerns, such as a desire to their binary conceptualizations of sexual orientation (7).
  • Bisexuality Among a Cohort of University Students: Prevalence and Psychological Distress

    Bisexuality Among a Cohort of University Students: Prevalence and Psychological Distress

    International Journal of Impotence Research https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-017-0014-2 ARTICLE Bisexuality among a cohort of university students: prevalence and psychological distress 1 1 2,3 1 1 4 Giacomo Ciocca ● Caterina Solano ● Giorgio Di Lorenzo ● Erika Limoncin ● Daniele Mollaioli ● Eleonora Carosa ● 4 5,6 2 2,3 2,3 Alberto Collazzoni ● Emiliano Santarnecchi ● Emanuela Bianciardi ● Cinzia Niolu ● Alberto Siracusano ● 4,7 1 Alessandro Rossi ● Emmanuele A. Jannini Received: 2 May 2017 / Revised: 21 September 2017 / Accepted: 4 October 2017 © 2017 Macmillan Publishers Limited, part of Springer Nature Abstract Sociocultural prejudices and pressures may impair the psychological symptoms, bisexuality is characterized by a mental health of bisexual people. We aim to evaluate strong link with some facets of psychological distress, psychological status according to sexual orientation in a which are likely caused by a peculiar double stigma. In sample of Italian university students, with specific attention conclusion, through a specific psychometric tool, we found to bisexuality and its frequency. Among a recruited sample an association between bisexuality and various forms of 1234567890 of 551 university students, we found the following psychological suffering. This evidence should further percentages for sexual orientation: heterosexuals 96.9% encourage clinicians to accurately assess the psychological (n = 534), homosexuals 1.1% (n = 6), bisexuals 2% (n = health in young bisexual people. 11). The cross-sectional analysis for psychological symp- toms, with the Symptoms Check List-90 Revised (SCL-90- R), revealed that bisexual subjects have statistically Introduction significant higher scores on some symptomatic scales compared to heterosexuals. In particular, obsession-com- The psychological wellness of lesbian, gay and bisexual pulsion, paranoid ideation, hostility were significantly (LGB) people is currently a matter of scientific debate and is higher in bisexuals.
  • 15-Bisexuality.Pdf

    15-Bisexuality.Pdf

    51 Bisexuality** What is Bisexuality? Bisexuality is the potential to feel sexually attracted to and to engage in sensual or sexual relationships with people of either sex. A bisexual person may not be equally attracted to both sexes, and the degree of attraction may vary over time. Self-perception is the key to bisexual identity. Many people engage in sexual activity with people of both sexes, yet do not identify as bisexual. Likewise, other people engage in sexual relations only with people of one sex, or do not engage in sexual activity at all, yet consider themselves bisexual. There is no behavioral "test" to determine whether or not one is bisexual. Bisexual Identity Some people believe that a person is born heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual (for instance due to prenatal hormonal influences), and that their identity is inherent and unchangeable. Others believe that sexual orientation is due to socialization (for example either imitating or rejecting parental models) or conscious choice (for example, choosing lesbianism as part of a political feminist identity). Others believe that these factors interact. Because biological, social, and cultural factors are different for each person, everyone's sexuality is highly individual, whether they are bisexual, gay or lesbian, heterosexual, or asexual. The "value" placed on a sexual identity should not depend on its origin. Many people assume that bisexuality is just a phase people go through. In fact, any sexual orientation can be a phase. Humans are diverse, and individual sexual feelings and behavior can change over time. The creation and consolidation of a sexual identity is an ongoing process.
  • Sex and the College Newspaper Student Columnists Explore a Familiar Campus Topic

    Sex and the College Newspaper Student Columnists Explore a Familiar Campus Topic

    Sex and the College Newspaper Student Columnists Explore a Familiar Campus Topic TlioiDM McOonmki for The New Yart Times Natalie Krinsky, 20, a sex columnist in The Yale Daily News, says she gets most of her material from classmates. By SARA RIMER reflecting a striking openness among many undergradu NEW HAVEN — It wasn't Natalie Krinsky's idea. But ates when it comes to the discussion of sex. The columns the editors at The Yale Daily News were sure she would be Include "Sexpert Tells All" in New York University's a natural: She was a good writer. She was funny. But most Washington Square News, The Daily Califomian's "Sex on of all, she was not easily embarrassed. Tuesdays" at the University of California at Berkeley and Now, a year later. Ms. Krinsky, a 20-year-old junior, is Meghan Bainum's odes to experimentation and safe sex In a campus celebrity, writing the most talked about column The Daily Kansan at the University of Kansas. Subjects in The News. She does not opine about the burning issues of range from sexual arousal to oral sex etiquette to bondage. the day: the univrt^sity's labor negotiations or the possible "If you've been missing a spark in your sex life," Ms. war in Iraq. Bainum, a 21-year-old senior in Lawrence, Kan., wrote in a Ms. Krinsky's subject is sex. recent column, "adding a good pair of handcuffs or a "Girls fake all the time," she wrote in one column. spanking or two to your normal routine could be the way "But'why? Convincing everyone in the room that you're for you to put the sprinkles on your ice cream cone." As wearing a diamond when in reality it's a cubic zirconia IS always, Ms.
  • Comparing Four Different Types of Sexual Fluidity in Women

    Comparing Four Different Types of Sexual Fluidity in Women

    Archives of Sexual Behavior https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-019-01565-1 ORIGINAL PAPER Who Counts as Sexually Fluid? Comparing Four Diferent Types of Sexual Fluidity in Women Lisa M. Diamond1 · Jenna Alley1 · Janna Dickenson2 · Karen L. Blair3 Received: 18 February 2019 / Revised: 19 September 2019 / Accepted: 3 October 2019 © Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019 Abstract Previous research has examined the phenomenon of “sexual fuidity,” but there is no current consensus on the specifc mean- ing and operationalization of this construct. The present study used a sample of 76 women with diverse sexual orientations to compare four diferent types of sexual fuidity: (1) fuidity as overall erotic responsiveness to one’s less-preferred gender, (2) fuidity as situational variability in erotic responsiveness to one’s less-preferred gender, (3) fuidity as discrepancy between the gender patterning of sexual attractions and the gender patterning of sexual partnering, and (4) fuidity as instability in day-to- day attractions over time. We examined how these four types of fuidity relate to one another and to other features of women’s sexual profles (bisexual vs. exclusive patterns of attraction, sex drive, interest in uncommitted sex, age of sexual debut, and lifetime number of sexual partners). The four types of fuidity were not correlated with one another (with the exception of the frst and fourth), and each showed a unique pattern of association with other features of women’s sexual profles. The only type of fuidity associated with bisexuality was overall erotic responsiveness to the less-preferred gender. The fndings demonstrate that future research on sexual fuidity should distinguish between its diferent forms.
  • From Bisexuality to Intersexuality Rethinking Gender Categories

    From Bisexuality to Intersexuality Rethinking Gender Categories

    From Bisexuality to Intersexuality Rethinking Gender Categories Jack Drescher, MD [email protected] www.jackdreschermd.net • No Disclosures Jack Drescher, MD [email protected] www.jackdreschermd.net 1 From Bisexuality to Intersexuality Rethinking Gender Categories I. Queer Theory II. Bisexuality III. Hierarchies IV. Nature V. Gender I. Queer Theory 2 Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (AIS) Intersex condition Genetic transmission (X-linked recessive) Developing, in utero cells unresponsive to masculinizing effects of prenatal androgens Child with XY chromosomes born with outer appearance of a girl Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (AIS) (Male Pseudohermaphroditism) 3 I. Queer Theory ? = Male Pseudohermaphrodite Girl I. Queer Theory Outgrowth of Gender/Gay & Lesbian Studies Play on double meaning of “queer,” historically disparaging term for gay people. “Queer” appropriated as marker of a unique, outsider’s take on cultural conventions. 4 I. Queer Theory Outgrowth of Gender/Gay & Lesbian Studies Challenges assumptions underlying binary categories like “masculinity/femininity,” or “homosexuality/heterosexuality.” Challenges cultural norms, seen as oppressive, “deconstructing” the implicit assumptions upon which such norms are based. Draws attention to how identities are socially constructed through history, language and custom, arguing that these identities do not arise from biological (essentialist) factors. Anne Fausto-Sterling The Five Sexes (1993) Males Merms (Male Pseudohermaphrodites) (True) Hermaphrodites Ferms (Female Pseudohermaphrodites) Females 5 6 II. Bisexuality Tea For Two? Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) Physical Bisexuality— ability of organism to develop as either male or female Ontogeny repeats phylogeny Metaphorical leap from physical bisexuality to psychological bisexuality 7 II. Bisexuality Presumes Only Two Sexes (Gender Binary) Females: Sugar and Spice and Everything Nice Males: Snips and Snails and Puppy Dog Tails II.
  • Death of Morality: Does It Portend Death of America

    Death of Morality: Does It Portend Death of America

    Touro Law Review Volume 32 Number 3 Article 6 2016 Death of Morality: Does it Portend Death of America Gerald Walpin Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/lawreview Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Walpin, Gerald (2016) "Death of Morality: Does it Portend Death of America," Touro Law Review: Vol. 32 : No. 3 , Article 6. Available at: https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/lawreview/vol32/iss3/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ Touro Law Center. It has been accepted for inclusion in Touro Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ Touro Law Center. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Walpin: Death of Morality DEATH OF MORALITY: DOES IT PORTEND DEATH OF AMERICA? Gerald Walpin∗ THE ISSUE How many times have you heard that government should not be involved in legislating morality? One representative libertarian objector to government involvement wrote that “if one really cares about morality, why would we let government anywhere near it,” be- cause “[w]hen society turns its aspirational morality over to the state, the state makes a mess of it.”1 Until 1992, the Supreme Court repeatedly rejected that liber- tarian view. For example, in as late as 1991, the Court upheld a state public indecency statute as within “[t]he traditional police power of the States . to provide for the public . morals.”2 That ruling reaf- firmed many similar rulings by the Court, for example, in 1986: “[t]he law . is constantly based on notions of morality . .”3 Then, suddenly, in 1992, the Court did a 180 degree reversal to de- clare that the Government had no right “to mandate our own moral 4 code.” ∗ Hon.
  • What Is the Coming out Experience of Polyamorous Individuals : an Exploratory Study : a Project Based Upon an Independent Investigation

    What Is the Coming out Experience of Polyamorous Individuals : an Exploratory Study : a Project Based Upon an Independent Investigation

    Smith ScholarWorks Theses, Dissertations, and Projects 2010 What is the coming out experience of polyamorous individuals : an exploratory study : a project based upon an independent investigation Andria Elizabeth Lavine Smith College Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.smith.edu/theses Part of the Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Lavine, Andria Elizabeth, "What is the coming out experience of polyamorous individuals : an exploratory study : a project based upon an independent investigation" (2010). Masters Thesis, Smith College, Northampton, MA. https://scholarworks.smith.edu/theses/1094 This Masters Thesis has been accepted for inclusion in Theses, Dissertations, and Projects by an authorized administrator of Smith ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Andria Lavine What is the Coming Out Experience of Polyamorous Individuals? An Exploratory Study ABSTRACT This exploratory study considered the following question: What is the coming out experience of polyamorous individuals? The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine how people manage multiple partnerships in a society that values monogamy as the accepted norm, and how people experience the process of coming out to friends, family and others in their community. The study was conducted with 73 participants via an online qualitative survey which also included some demographic questions. The major findings of this exploratory study indicated that coming out experiences varied widely amongst participants. While all participants shared the polyamorous identity, many other factors contributed to their coming out experience including intersections with other relevant identities such as GLB, transgender, genderqueer or those who identify as part of the BDSM (Bondage, discipline, dominance, submission, sadism and masochism) community.
  • Lessons from Bisexual Erasure for Asexual Erasure

    Lessons from Bisexual Erasure for Asexual Erasure

    Lessons from bisexual erasure for asexual erasure Abstract: In the absence of research into the specific motives for asexual erasure, the motives for bisexual erasure as theorised by Kenji Yoshino are appropriated for that purpose. The motives to 1) preserve the stability of sexual orientations 2) preserve sex as an important distinguishing trait and 3) preserve norms of monogamy, identified as underpinning bisexual erasure, are each applied to asexuality. The conclusions reached suggest that motives 2) and 3) to erase bisexuality could theoretically be strengthened in the case of asexual erasure, and motive 1), while not logically applicable to asexuality, nonetheless suggests an additional potential reason why asexuality is erased. Keywords: Asexuality, Bisexuality, Erasure, Kenji Yoshino, LGBT+ discrimination. Lessons from bisexual erasure for asexual erasure Erasure is often cited as being the primary challenge facing the asexual community in its efforts to establish a position for itself next to the other “mainstream” sexual orientations. Asexual awareness movements, to borrow from Andrew Sullivan (1996) are “less a matter of complaint than of pride”. And the desire for pride is not easily dismissed as trivial. Yet neither is pride easy to cultivate. This is the challenge of asexual erasure and as challenges go it is a substantial one. However, as with all challenges in life, there is no better advice than to understand the challenge before confronting it. Understanding is what this essay sets out to achieve. Kenji Yoshino’s (2000) article The epistemic contract of bisexual erasure inspired me to do so and supplies the content of this essay. Until I came across Yoshino’s work one could have argued that I did not understand why erasure takes place insofar as I did not fully appreciate how it can function as a defence against the “threats” posed by an aberrant sexual community.
  • Carnal Knowledge Cover Story

    Carnal Knowledge Cover Story

    »INSIDE: A SIMPLE PLAN FOR RECRUITING, TRAINING AND RETAINING • SURVIVING THE GAME THE FLAGSHIP PUBLICATION OF COLLEGE MEDIA ADVISERS, INC. • SPRING 2007 • VOL. 44 NO. 4 Plain Brown Wrapper Edition EDITOR'S CORNER Sex and Bill Neville. For the faint of heart, rest assured that’s not the title of a new reality show. College Media Review But it is what’s been on my mind as the spring’s issue of CMR takes form. is an official publication of College Media Let me address them separately. Bob Schieffer writes in one of his memoirs that when he Advisers Inc. ; however, views expressed within its pages are those of the writers and reported live that President Clinton had admitted to having oral sex with Monica Lewinsky, he do not necessarily reflect opinions of the described it as “sex of a kind” because he couldn’t imagine his mother hearing him utter the other organization or of its officers. phrase verbatim in public. Many of today’s student journalists, whether or not they subscribe to Any writer submitting articles must follow most of the ideals admired by Schieffer, don’t have that hang-up. Matters of sex, it would seem, the Writers Guidelines included on page 31. are still on the minds of our youth, which ought not surprise to any of us who remember our COrrESPONDENCE own. Address circulation inquiries to: Ron Spielberger, Executive Director Not only are our students talking about sex (and presumably practicing what they preach), College Media Advisers but now they’ve got the gall to write about it.
  • Bisexuality Basics

    Bisexuality Basics

    Bisexuality Basics Adapted from the Bisexual Resource Center web site: http://www.biresource.org What is Bisexuality? Bisexuality is the potential to feel sexually attracted to and to engage in sensual or sexual relationships with people of either sex. A bisexual person may not be equally attracted to both sexes, and the degree of attraction may vary over time. Self-perception is the key to a bisexual identity. Many people engage in sexual activity with people of both sexes, yet do not identify as bisexual. Likewise, other people engage in sexual relations only with people of one sex, or do not engage in sexual activity at all, yet consider themselves bisexual. There is no behavioral "test'' to determine whether or not one is bisexual. Bisexual Identity Some people believe that a person is born heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual (for instance due to prenatal hormonal influences), and that their identity is inherent and unchangeable. Others believe that sexual orientation is due to socialization (for example either imitating or rejecting parental models) or conscious choice (for example, choosing lesbianism as part of a political feminist identity). Others believe that these factors interact. Because biological, social, and cultural factors are different for each person, everyone's sexuality is highly individual, whether they are bisexual, gay or lesbian, heterosexual, or asexual. The ``value'' placed on a sexual identity should not depend on its origin. Many people assume that bisexuality is just a phase people go through. In fact, any sexual orientation can be a phase. Humans are diverse, and individual sexual feelings and behavior change over time.
  • Bisexuality Basics (Pdf)

    Bisexuality Basics (Pdf)

    UC Riverside LGBT Resource Center 245 Costo Hall • www.out.ucr.edu Bisexuality Basics (951) 827-2267 • [email protected] What Is Bisexuality? Bisexuality is the potential to feel attracted (sexually, romantically, emotionally) to and to engage in sensual or sexual relationships with people of either sex. A bisexual person may not be equally attracted to both sexes, and the degree of attraction may vary over time. Self-perception is the key to a bisexual identity. Many people engage in sexual activity with people of both sexes, yet do not identify as bisexual. Likewise, other people engage in sexual relations only with people of one sex, or do not engage in sexual activity at all, yet consider themselves bisexual. There is no behavioral “test’’ to determine whether or not one is bisexual. Bisexual Identity Some people believe that a person is born heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual (for instance due to prenatal hormonal influences), and that their identity is inherent and unchangeable. Others believe that sexual orientation is due to socialization (for example either imitating or rejecting parental models) or conscious choice (for example, choosing lesbianism as part of a political feminist identity). Others believe that these factors interact. Because biological, social, and cultural factors are different for each person, everyone’s sexuality is highly individual, whether they are bisexual, gay or lesbian, heterosexual, or asexual. The “value” placed on a sexual identity should not depend on its origin. Many people assume that bisexuality is just a phase people go through. In fact, any sexual orientation can be a phase. Humans are diverse, and individual sexual feelings and behavior change over time.