On 8/10/06, Doug Henwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Aug 10, 2006, at 11:45 AM, Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
> If you take a global view and focus on working-class and peasant
> sexual behavior, that's far more prevalent than the bourgeois Western
> invention of bi/homo/hetero sexual identities.
Well, yeah, but isn't it good that people can live their sexuality
openly? Would admitting that be saying too kind a thing about
bourgeois society?
IMHO, neither the bourgeois Western notion of homo/bi/hetero nor the
globally prevalent dichotomy of active/passive is ideal, and neither
is superior to the other in the total pleasure yield: according to the
homo/bi/hetero model, men who have sex with other men are a minority
(maybe just one in ten) called homosexual or bisexual, and the
majority don't do any such thing, nor can they easily admit to being
"bicurious" without getting fag-baited in most contexts, but there is
equality between tops and bottoms within gay culture; according to the
active/passive model, all men are presumed to be capable of desiring
to have sex with other men, but there is no equality between tops and
bottoms, and bottoms can get stigmatized.
--
Yoshie
<http://montages.blogspot.com/>
<http://mrzine.org>
<http://monthlyreview.org/>
