it's interesting because even the phrase "sexual preference" implies choice when I think it's pretty well believed by people with a preference other than "straight" that it's not really a choice they've made
( ... )
well I'm saying that, arguably, it's a semantically bad term for what it has come to mean traditionally , so overloading it even more is probably not the best way to describe what you are asking about.
So I guess my short answer to your original question is "no", but not entirely for the reasons one might expect. non-monogamy might be described as an orientation, but the even the connotations of that word are sort of unidirectional and thus monogamist.
So then, you think that the way the terms "sexual orientation" and "sexual preference" are socially predisposed towards disposed towards description of sex/gender preference to such a degree that they can't be used for other purposes, though semantically they might be applicable?
I can buy that.
So, then, do you think there's socio-political value in whatever nomenclature is used? Do you think that those interested in legitimizing non-monogamous relationships might benefit from trying to co-opt the terms from the "LGBT Community?" Do you think other terms would be a better choice?
Reply
<3
Reply
So...then...what you're saying is that you don't care for the term "sexual preference" in any context?
:)
Reply
So I guess my short answer to your original question is "no", but not entirely for the reasons one might expect. non-monogamy might be described as an orientation, but the even the connotations of that word are sort of unidirectional and thus monogamist.
Reply
I can buy that.
So, then, do you think there's socio-political value in whatever nomenclature is used? Do you think that those interested in legitimizing non-monogamous relationships might benefit from trying to co-opt the terms from the "LGBT Community?" Do you think other terms would be a better choice?
Reply
Leave a comment