More Colors in a Rainbow
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 8356967 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Ine Vanwesenbeeck (0000-0001-5800-3771, Utrecht University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2016 |
| Volume | 45 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 521-523 |
| Publication date | 2016-04-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Archives of Sexual Behavior (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0004-0002 • E-ISSN: 1573-2800 |
| Publisher | Springer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1007/s10508-015-0627-9 |
| PMID | 26408010 |
| OpenAlex | W1608338709 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 1 |
With her sexual configurations theory (SCT), van Anders (2015) wants to solve a number of problems with the current conceptualization of sexual orientation as defined by the sex of the partner(s) one is attracted to and habitually indicated with the Kinsey score varying from completely heterosexual to completely homosexual. I agree with van Anders that the conventional conceptualization of sexual orientation has a number of shortcomings. Indeed, why would the sex of our desired partners be the prime organizing feature of our sexuality? What is the role of partners’ genderedness or of other major person characteristics? “Biological sex” is not as clear-cut a category to justify its monopoly position in sexual orientation theory in the first place. Obviously, reliance on (difference or similarity between) discrete binary categories ill-caters for those who do not fit them, such as intersex and trans people. Moreover, Kinsey scores are extremely crude. And they are ill-catering for asexuality and inconsiderate of solo sexual experiences. Besides, “the score” assumes stability where we know dynamic fluidity exists. And indeed, the empirical differences in scores on the various domains of sexual orientation (attraction, self-identification, and behavior) add to the confusion of what we are exactly referring to when talking about “sexual orientation.” Because of all these problems, van Anders proposes SCT, aimed to better “address the complexities of actual people’s sexualities” and she wants to do so in an inclusive, norm free, and non-discriminatory way. She claims SCTs usefulness for self-knowledge and sexual minorities’ empowerment, as well as for neuroendocrinological, social, and health-related research methodologies and clinical practice. I gladly take the opportunity to share why I feel she has come a long way in reaching those goals while at the same time not fully fulfilling her ambitious promises. First, a short description of the SCT is in order
Asexuality · Conceptualization · Human sexuality · Sexual attraction · Sexual behavior · Sexual orientation · Sociology · Gender Studies · LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy · Marriage and Sexual Relationships · Psychology · Sexuality, Behavior, and Technology · Social Psychology
| Citations per year | 0.22 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2017 - 2021 (5) |
| Highly cited | No |