People are invited as much as possible to be open about their sexuality. To confess what you fall for. This means that you are forced to think about your sexual identity and orientation. And then you have to make a choice. Whether you are heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, asexual, pansexual or whatever. It is important that you speak up. Why is that anyway? Who has something to gain from this?
- What is sexual orientation?
- What is gender identity?
- What is sexual identity?
- The self and the other
- Gender identity as a power construct
- The interest of companies and government in free sexual morality
- Out of the closet
- How do you get sexual freedom?
What is sexual orientation?
You define your sexual orientation by determining the sex or gender of the person(s) to whom you feel sexually and/or romantically attracted. So it’s all about which gender you want sex and/or a relationship with. It therefore says nothing about the question of whether this focus or orientation is innate (as is assumed in the concept of orientation) or is acquired during your life. Your sexual orientation is in principle separate from your gender identity.
What is gender identity?
Your gender identity says something about how you define yourself; which gender or sex you feel you belong to. This concerns your experience, how you feel (gender identity) and the way you express yourself (gender expression). You can choose not to express your gender identity in everyday life. Gender expression has a strong cultural component, as not all cultures have the same views on what is male, female or otherwise when it comes to behavior and appearance.
What is sexual identity?
The combination of sexual orientation and gender identity determines your sexual identity. This can be classified into one of many categories of sexual identity. This includes heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, pansexuality, asexuality, and so on. This sexual identity does not have to be fixed. It might just change during your lifetime. And that’s actually not that strange. If your personality can change, your identity, your role in society, why not your gender identity and sexual orientation? That does not mean that it can be imposed from outside. But for many people it is mainly a frightening and not liberating idea. Many people think that if your partner’s sexual identity or your own can change, where is your point of reference?
The self and the other
The sexual act is seen as an intrinsic part of your personality and nourishes your identity and that of others. Defining your sexual identity is about defining yourself and how the other person sees you; on an individual level, but also on a macro level. To explain this philosophically we can consult the philosophers Sartre and Foucault.
Sartre
According to Jean Paul Sartre, as a human being you are free and conscious. A man is nothing in himself, but only a sum of his actions. Living is doing. You are born as a human being without a purpose. You write your own life story through the choices you make. But there is no plot, no (hero) goal. This also means that you are obliged to give meaning and meaning to your life. You cannot do this alone, but you always do this with others. Sartre emphasized that the other defines you based on what he or she sees. Your social role is therefore also dependent on others, because you fulfill it together, as it were. You should not let yourself be guided by others, because that leads to a sense of duty towards others and is at the expense of your freedom. Everyone’s life is worth the same, Sartre reasoned. That gives hope. And a responsibility to make something of our own lives. With the other.
Foucault
Foucault is also convinced that you are only made into a human being, an individual, in and through the world around you. But unlike Sartre, Foucault assumes that you give up your freedom as a result of discipline by the power that is exercised on you as an individual by the various power structures in society. All actions are aimed at keeping people in line. So that we behave as adapted, eager citizens. Ranging from institutions such as a general practitioner, psychologist, physiotherapist, to institutions such as a child health clinic, school, work, and contacts with family, friends, etc. You are also part of society and, by internalizing power, you also actively contribute to maintaining that same power and limiting your freedom. No one wants to be excluded or punished. We can therefore only experience freedom within limits, within the limits set by power. What we call freedom is therefore by definition unfree. In fact, everything we say and do is tied to power techniques. There are expectations, associations and behaviors attached to everything. While with Sartre man was still the central unit and, according to him, you could determine who you are, with Foucault this has been replaced by the power structures; they determine who you are. By connecting sexual activity to personality and individuality, you magnify sexuality. Big enough that as a society we can control, manage and sell it. For example, through mandatory ‘sexual education’ lessons at primary and secondary schools.
Gender identity as a power construct
In being allowed to express your sexual identity, Foucault does not focus on increased freedom, but on increased pressure to confess. It is common to think that all sexual expressions were suppressed in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries and that people were only ‘liberated’ since the 1960s. By encouraging people to speak out about their sexual preference under the guise of openness. As a result, people actively identify with a certain group and start to behave accordingly. In this way, power is not only repressive, but also productive. We are the society. Through this openness and division in sexual identities, power gains knowledge. The power is knowledge. Foucault therefore argues that it was precisely the nineteenth century that produced sexuality. By separating sexuality from technology, from pleasure, from the body, but instead connecting it to a person, to personal lust and desires. This is how it went from being self-evident to being part of our identity. But according to Foucault, we are more than our sexuality.
The interest of companies and government in free sexual morality
Through the media we are exposed to all kinds of advertisements, series, news items, films and other programs about gender and sex, which have an impact on our emotions and our brains. And sex sells. Whether we buy the advertised products or not, we are bombarded with propaganda for certain body images and lifestyles. We reflect on that. It is important for the sex industry that people dare and want to purchase sex products without hesitation or shame. After all, we should enjoy sex. Through revealing confessions on social media or through search behavior on the internet, targeted advertisements for sex items or experiences reach the right target group. So that even more can be sold. But sales are not the only goal. Just think of what is possible with all the data with a hashtag like #MeToo. You can create very extensive (customer) profiles, but you can also simply find out how often it happens, and where, the names of the wrong men mentioned in the messages, and so on. You can also visit social media if you want to know the average opinion (or the spread thereof) on a particular subject. This allows you to advertise specifically, but also set up targeted health campaigns. So identifying sexual identity also has advantages for the government. The more we talk about sex, the better the subject can be mapped out. And that makes supervision and control possible. This means it can be used to promote sexual health. Unfortunately, it can also be used by malicious parties to exclude and track people.
So we are not free when we talk openly about sex. It is expected of us. And so we do what we should do. No freedom. We adapt. This way we determine together what normal sex is. And at the same time, that also forces us in the same direction. A program like ‘How to be gay’ (NPO 2, from November 23, 2018, 6 episodes on TV) fits into this trend. In this series, Margriet van der Linden travels the world in six episodes to show the state of acceptance of homosexuality in the world by conducting compelling personal interviews.
Naturally, there are some things to criticize about Foucault’s analysis. But he already realized in 1984 (the year of his death) that speaking openly about your sexual identity closes the door to part of your personal experience. So even out of the closet, you are still stuck in one of the rooms of the society house.
Out of the closet
The idea is that by coming out about your sexual identity you can better understand the world and be more yourself. Only then are you truly free to be yourself. Only then can you show yourself as you are. You have something to hold on to, because you know that you belong somewhere. And others can understand you through what they know about you.
At the same time, this can also create a strict straitjacket. To what extent are you still free? It also works the other way around. Precisely because you come out, you ensure the compartmentalization. And this means you can be less yourself, because the moment you tell the other person what your sexual orientation is, you belong to a certain group. And you give up a bit of your own freedom to meet the requirements of belonging to this group. You will also be held accountable for this. People are curious and want to show themselves as tolerant. So they ask questions. Intimate questions.
You also see this in the resistance among, for example, some gay men to Gay Pride, because they do not recognize themselves in the image that is painted of them during, among other things, the Canal Parade. But heterosexual men also have to present themselves as heterosexual and therefore have to avoid any possible similarities. For example, girls who play football can still be seen as lesbian.
Especially when it comes to the emancipation of (minority) groups, there is a double message: you have to identify with a certain (separate) group in order to ensure that you belong to it. The Rutg ers Foundation has published a 2014 publication on a survey among 5,000 LGBT people as ‘A world of difference’. On the one hand this refers to the different world of LGBTs and on the other hand it indicates that there are many differences between them. One of the first goals of this research report is to promote sexual health. This is also the case if you are hired because you are ‘the best woman’, or because you ‘have to ensure that the organization becomes more reflective of society’. A more ostentatious way to make yourself a woman or a representative of a minority group rather than a human being is hardly possible. And then? Should you behave or profile yourself as such? Are you addressed as a representative of a group or are you allowed to act in a personal capacity? It is clear that here too, power continues to determine who belongs and who does not.
How do you get sexual freedom?
Don’t fall into the confession trap. Why would you limit yourself and others to a category? It is important to define and distinguish yourself as a moral subject, as Sartre also indicated. We must be true to ourselves. How can you treat yourself and others respectfully? How to keep the fun going in relationships. This is not about the way in which love and sex are forced on us through the powerful media, but about the deeply personal interpretation of your own (and other people’s) needs and desires. What feels good to you? And what about the other? How can you enjoy sex (together)? So that you do love instead of just talking about it. Of course you can talk about yourself and your experience. In her pamphlet Love, Marli Huijer gives examples of questions we can ask ourselves and each other: ,What are natural (not economic or politically driven) lusts in this day and age? What are favorable or pleasant moments to make love? Which acts of love are appropriate? best for the stage of life and the position you are in? How do your views on what a valuable life is relate to your attitude towards everything that gives pleasure?,. And on a more personal level: ,Which form of relationship suits who we are or want to be? And which promises fit with that? How can you organize your life or your environment in such a way that it takes no effort to keep those promises?,.
Foucault introduces the term ‘truth-speaking’ for this purpose. This is not about finding the truth, but about seeking the truth. By constantly analyzing the development of your own truths and speaking about them, you try to break free from the existing power structures. But it is very difficult, almost impossible, to do this outside the system. Yet we can try and be aware of the impact that the knowledge and power systems have on our being.
In her book Beminnen (2018), Marli Huijer makes a number of proposals to further shape sexual freedom:
To prevent distinctions between different relationships and forms of cohabitation, marriage, she suggests, is best abolished. Of course the rituals can remain, but the institution itself can be closed down. A visit to the notary is sufficient to arrange everything properly. We are all equal in that respect. And then every connection, every anniversary of it, can be worth celebrating. By paying attention to the diversity of (love) relationships in this way, we gain much more freedom than is currently the case. By making less distinction and no longer setting a form of society as the norm, groups can no longer be played off against each other.
Connecting people should be central and not the sexual relationship, Marli Huijer emphasizes. Not every heterosexual contact means attraction or a relationship. Just as two men holding hands does not automatically have to mean a love relationship. Whatever others think about it. It’s not about who or what you are, it’s about who you want to connect with. Without cubicles. Without scripts. You can already raise children with that. For example, by no longer asking children the question: ‘Who will you marry later?’ But to actively emphasize that sexual/romantic relationships are about the connection between (adult) people. How you shape the connection is personal and everyone can use his or her own imagination. Ultimately, it’s about the relationship and those within that relationship. It is about doing love, like doing life, and not about naming and limiting love. And everyone can think something about that, without you having to worry about it.