|
When talking about sexual behavior, it is important to remember the distinctions between gender role behavior, erotic behavior, reproductive behavior, and life-enhancing behavior. Many writers use the term “sexual behavior” rather loosely and do not distinguish between its different meanings. They treat them as interchangeable, and, in the course of an argument, may shift from one meaning to another without becoming aware of it. This can lead to fundamental fallacies.
For example: Some resarchers have studied the mating patterns of rats, i.e. their reproductive behavior, and then used their findings to draw conclusions about the erotic behavior of humans. However, this is an error. It results from calling both behaviors “sexual” without any further distinctions. It is like “comparing apples and oranges” by calling both of them fruits. Quite apart from the fact that rats are not people, this equation ignores that, in humans, the erotic and reproductive behaviors are very different matters.
Or, to take another example: For many years, researchers drew false analogies between erotic behavior and gender role behavior. Thus, they equated homosexuality in males with femininity and called it “sexual inversion”. As they explained it, in some men, the sexual desires had become “inverted”, i.e. had been replaced by desires that are typical of women. Indeed, such “inverts” had “female souls in their male bodies”. These researchers did not realize - or did not want to admit - that they were dealing here with entirely separate issues. A man’s gender role does not necessarily have anything to do with his sexual orientation. After all, very feminine men may very well be erotically attracted to women while very masculine men may be attracted to other men. Once again, the failure to make the necessary distinctions prevented any true insight.
The following sections will discuss these distinctions in detail.
|
