Sexual fluidity: what do YOU think?

Photo by Dave Hoefler on Unsplash

Two points of view below, one from Evan Smith, author of Gay LDS Crossroads, and another from guest author Blaire Ostler, a philosopher specialized in queer studies, and a leading voice at the intersection of queer, Mormon, and transhumanist thought. What do YOU think?

First Evan, from GayLDSCrossroads, chapter 3:

Notwithstanding the scientific findings explaining the origins of sexual orientation, a few individuals have told me that since some people have shown “fluidity” in their sexuality over time, sexual orientation can’t be just a purely biological thing. They argue that some choice in sexual desire is obviously present because of that demonstrated flexibility. I believe that is a faulty conclusion though. The sexual orientation spectrum is broad because the brains of developing babies absorb wide-ranging levels of hormones while in the womb. Brain development in utero puts most babies on the primarily straight or primarily gay ends of the spectrum. But some people seem to have developed in utero with hormonal absorption levels somewhere in the middle, so they are born with bisexual orientation. They still have an unchosen biological orientation – it just happens to allow for more natural flexibility. Stated differently:

“Some will argue that our commonsense experiences are full of people who are “fluid” in their sexual orientations or change their sexualities…Change is widely used to argue against biological explanations. Critics will say that if behaviour changes, or is “fluid,” then surely it can’t have a biological basis? This is false because it is our biology that allows us to learn, respond to socialisation, and helps generate our culture. So showing evidence of change is not an argument against biology. There is indeed some fluidity in sexuality over time, predominantly among women. But there is no “bell shaped curve” to sexual orientation. People may change the identity labels they use and who they have sex with but sexual attractions seem stable over time.” (https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2015/jul/24/gay-genes-science-is-on-the-right-track-were-born-this-way-lets-deal-with-it)

So a biological explanation for sexual orientation is not diminished just because we see someone in a gay relationship at one point and then later observe them to have a straight relationship instead. All that might mean is that they are biologically wired somewhere in the middle of the sexual orientation spectrum – i.e., their biological orientation doesn’t change; it just provides that particular person more fluidity in attractions. This is analogous to the way that an ambidextrous person may alternate between feeling comfortable using their right or left hand in different situations or over the course of their life.

Next from Blaire Ostler, author of Queer Mormon Theology: An Introduction. This is from her blog at blaireostler.com posted with permission:

I’m not certain as to where this attitude came from, but there is a notion that sexuality is fixed because you were “born that way.” While that might be true for most of the population, that’s not true for everyone, especially sexually fluid bisexuals. While I understand how the “born that way” campaign has been helpful in furthering the cause of LGBTQ+ acceptance, it doesn’t tell the whole story. While I don’t think sexual orientation is something a person consciously chooses, that doesn’t mean a person’s sexuality doesn’t fluctuate, change, or adapt.

There have been times in my life I thought I was exclusively homosexual, and other times I thought I was exclusively heterosexual. During these times I wasn’t confused about what I wanted sexually. I knew quite well what I wanted. My wants simply changed. While I certainly don’t presume sexual fluidity as a universal phenomenon or a reason to impose conversion therapy onto fixed homosexuals, I do think sexually fluid bisexuality is just as legitimate of an orientation as fixed monosexuality.

Yet, for some reason sexually fluid bisexuals are accused of being confused or illegitimate. Strict, fixed, monosexuality might work for most of the population, but it doesn’t work for sexually fluid bisexuals. Our wants might even change from one night to the next, but that in no way makes our experience or orientation illegitimate. I like what I like, when I like it. That doesn’t mean I always get what I want, but it also doesn’t mean I’m confused about what I want. It means my sexuality is fluid. I’m adaptable and my sexual attraction is not limited to a fixed type of genitalia.

Granted, some bisexuals are more fluid than others. It is not my intention to suggest that all bisexuals are as fluid as myself. I also do not intend to convey that I think sexual fluidity is better than sexually fixed orientations. What I am saying is my husband could change his body, biology, morphology, genitals, or esthetics, and I will always want him. If that makes my sexual orientation gross, repulsive, or illegitimate to you, that’s your problem. My desire for my husband will never be limited by his genitals or pronouns (“More than a Statistic,” by Blaire Ostler, emphasis added, posted with permission).

Those are Evan’s and Blaire’s thoughts; what do YOU think?