Gender As It Relates To Sexuality

In today’s society, there is a huge importance placed on how we sexually identify ourselves to the world. This predominant heteronormative ideology that exists in North America and many parts of the world has an enormous effect on how we view, understand and learn about our sexualities . For the most part, sexuality is understood to be binary; people are either heterosexual (presumed) or homosexual (identified). While other labels do exists these two labels prevail and are the most widely recognized.

---

Disclaimer: this page seeks to explore some of the ways in which individuals working within the predominant heteronormative binary experience discrimination. Please visit these pages for information about non-binary groups and the ways in which they experience discrimination:

• Asexual
• Bisexual
• Genderqueer
• Queer
• Polysexual
• Pansexual
• Gray Asexuality
• Androphilia and Gynephilia

Definitions

Sexuality

Van den Berg’s defines sexuality as: “sexuality involves the things people do, think and feel that is related to their sexual desires”

Sexuality has been traditionally understood through one of two lenses: biological essentialism or social constructionism. Whilst social constructionism identifies external forces as the determinant of an individual's sexuality, biological essentialism focus on the internal factors such as “genes, hormones and brain anatomy” (Iudici & Verdecchia 738). These two approaches are in constant conflict: “social constructivist scholars have taken biological determinism to task by emphasizing that such an approach to gender and sexuality is simplistic and reductionist (Youdell*). Moreover, they have pointed out that biological determinism serves the interests of patriarchal ideologies”(Van den Berg, 385). These very different ways of understanding sexuality do however have one main commonality in that they both are currently used to enforce the dominant patriarchal heterosexist way in which we currently understand sexuality (Myerson et al.). Sexuality has been traditionally understood through one of two lenses: biological essentialism or social constructionism. Whilst social constructionism identifies external forces as the determinant of an individual's sexuality, biological essentialism focus on the internal factors such as “genes, hormones and brain anatomy” (Iudici & Verdecchia 738). These two approaches are in constant conflict: “social constructivist scholars have taken biological determinism to task by emphasizing that such an approach to gender and sexuality is simplistic and reductionist (Youdell*). Moreover, they have pointed out that biological determinism serves the interests of patriarchal ideologies”(Van den Berg, 385). These very different ways of understanding sexuality do however have one main commonality in that they both are currently used to enforce the dominant patriarchal heterosexist way in which we currently understand sexuality (Myerson et al.).