This essay attempts to identify the prominent problems of a strictly social constructionist theory as it pertains to homosexuality. One’s sexuality is neither explicitly innate and immutable, nor as plastic and changeable as switching a dial. Social constructionist theories on homosexuality – and, indeed on sexuality in general – have concentrated on the latter in a milieu of social control. And while it is easier to understand the labelling and categorising of humans through historical study of the methods of social control, for laws controlling human actions, specifically sexual conduct, are written in well kept records, there is a lot to be gained by switching the focus to the victim in such cases, rather than exclusively focusing on the offenders.
What I propose is a partial redirection of the studies on “Queer” theory from the offender, the homophobe, to the victim, the homosexual. While maintaining the percept of cultural and temporal factors, we can explore the existence of a homosexual identity if we look towards the subject (the homosexual) in order to gain an understanding of his world view. Further this partial redirection leads us to unify a moderate Social Constructionist theory with a moderate essentialist theory.
- (DVI Format)
- (HTML Format)
- (PDF Format)
- (PostScript Format)
Follow me on Twitter 
