Heidegger's Abyss: Ungrounding Sexual Fluidity
Abstract
The notion of fluidity in gender and sexual identity is not a new one. Critics like Adrienne Rich maintain that all female relationships fall on a “lesbian continuum” (648), a theory that problematizes the orderly binaries of straight/gay. She rejects categories of identity and argues for a woman-identified experience. Similarly, geneticist Anne Fausto-Sterling calls for a more fluid definition of gender in her article, “The Five Sexes: Why Male and Female Are Not Enough.” In spite of both the socio-psychological and biological arguments that affirm fluid gender and sexual identities—as well as the recent Supreme Court decision that supports marriage equality—many people struggle to extend or modify their perception of gender and sexuality. Martin Heidegger explains in What is Called Thinking, “. . . to lose . . . is harder than to find . . . ‘To lose’ here means to make ourselves truly free . . .” (52). I would argue that religion, an essentialized understanding of gender and sexual identities, and personal experience are three of the most significant barriers to unground sexual fluidity. According to Heidegger, though, we must “leave the familiar landscape” (150) if we are to be free.
Heidegger's Abyss: Ungrounding Sexual Fluidity
Room 214, West Center
The notion of fluidity in gender and sexual identity is not a new one. Critics like Adrienne Rich maintain that all female relationships fall on a “lesbian continuum” (648), a theory that problematizes the orderly binaries of straight/gay. She rejects categories of identity and argues for a woman-identified experience. Similarly, geneticist Anne Fausto-Sterling calls for a more fluid definition of gender in her article, “The Five Sexes: Why Male and Female Are Not Enough.” In spite of both the socio-psychological and biological arguments that affirm fluid gender and sexual identities—as well as the recent Supreme Court decision that supports marriage equality—many people struggle to extend or modify their perception of gender and sexuality. Martin Heidegger explains in What is Called Thinking, “. . . to lose . . . is harder than to find . . . ‘To lose’ here means to make ourselves truly free . . .” (52). I would argue that religion, an essentialized understanding of gender and sexual identities, and personal experience are three of the most significant barriers to unground sexual fluidity. According to Heidegger, though, we must “leave the familiar landscape” (150) if we are to be free.
