Pop Theory 8: Just Knowing

Pop Theory 8: Just Knowing

In this column I want to address a point about sexuality that many of you, my thoughtful commentators, broached in your responses to my assertion that sexuality is a choice. In this column, I want to address the notion of “knowing”; in regard to sexuality, oftentimes people acknowledge and formulate the coming to terms with their sexuality as something that they just “know,” as something that is inexpressible, or as a metaphysical something that can only be expressed in vague terms, something internal, inherent and quintessential to the self.

This topic has been on my mind for quite some time now, not only because of your astute comments but also because, as a very special ladyfriend of mine has so often reiterated throughout our many discussions about sexuality, while sexual identity is in fact an ethical decision, I’ve yet to satisfactorily explain that “feeling,” that perception of something internal within us that catalyzes the whole process of self-knowledge in regard to sexuality. Or, as she so finely states it, “You have to define ‘that thing’ that people point to as the origin( s ) of their homosexuality, whether genetic or not.”

(Yes, readers, this ladyfriend is indeed special, if only because she continuously challenges me. So, this column is for you.)

This “knowing,” this perception of something internal to the self, has been on my mind especially after seeing Pariah this past week — a film, like so many gay bildungsromans, which emphasizes the denouement of “coming out” as anti-climatic. (On a tangential note, I think the film that most fantastically parodies, through deferral and hyperbole, among other dramatic devices, the entire coming out process is But I’m A Cheerleader.) Why? Because it’s something that everyone already “know” or “feels” to be “true,” even though it’s not been verbalized or confirmed by the person coming out. In literature and film, the moment of realization is portrayed as a type of intimate self-knowledge, a mature, self-understanding or an awareness of something once unknown or unrecognized within the self that is now “known.”

To refresh your memory, here’s what I wrote in a past Pop Theory column:

I want to argue that there is no inherent, absolute correlation between our (internal/libidinal) desires and our (external/cultural) identity....

Desires are pre-personal forces (or impersonal, meaning they have no “identity”) that are continuously proliferating and continuously moving within and through (human) bodies. Desires can be harnessed (for action) and can be pshychologized



Comments [4]

toodlin's picture

Marcie, here is what I

Marcie, here is what I think.  When you talk about the correlation between desire and identity or action, you make identity somehow all about desire, and I do not think that is the case.  To me homosexuality is ultimately about gender expression, to me a homosexual is a specific animal which is male/female physiologically, that is to say, in the body and in the brain.  To me this gender expression is the source of identity, and the source of that desire which is gender-same.  I saw a really interesting article, a small one, awhile ago on the bbc website about the study of gay brains in relation to straight ones.  What the study found is that lesbians brains more closely resemble that of straight male brains, and gay male brains more closely resemble that of straight female brains.  Can't remember the specifics, but it has something to do with the size of the lobes, lesbians being more "rational/ male brained"  --I can't ever remember which side of the brain is the rational and which is the intuitive.  I'll try to find the article.  That is by no means an explanation of that desire which is same -gender, but, I would argue to you that a homosexual belongs to a tribe of same persons of same gender expression.  I certainly do believe you can choose your social identity, you can choose your lover, there are all sorts of active choices you can make about social identity.  But i do believe there is an inherent identity, which I couldn't quite ever put my finger on and yet which i do believe is of gender expression.  Gender is intimately related to identity, and I believe, to spiritual energy.  I believe the male/femaleness which is expressed in persons and which you often can see is an expression of spiritual energy in which creative energy is highly contained within one individual.  That is, where most straight people come together and express their mystical power to create by having babies, homosexuals express creative energy differently, by creating visions, by being creative persons, and as such really always stand somewhat outside "normal" society.  To me, this is the metaphysical meaning of homosexuality. Just a few thoughts  smileyface!

 

Marcie Bianco's picture

Hi Toodlin! I see where you

Hi Toodlin! I see where you are coming from, but I strongly believe in thinking about the difference between sexual desire and gender identity. I do agree that sexual identities -- those labels like "lesbian" that we identify with, for instance -- usually are used in reference more to one's gender than one's sexual proclivities...That are sexual identities are used to refer to an ambiguous conflation of our sexual desires and our gender expression. David Halperin talks about this, slightly, in his new book "How To Be Gay" (Harvard UP 2012).

Thanks for this!

toodlin's picture

You are a thinker, Marcie

You are a thinker, Marcie

Marcie Bianco's picture

For better and/or worse,

For better and/or worse, Toodlin Wink