Laura T. Smith: Teaching

I believe that the answer to this question is in the very start of this piece. By comparing sex and sexuality, seemingly two synonyms of different conjugation, the author sets his view apart from most.

Consider sex: the thrusting of bodies, the mechanical beginnings to humanity, and the things we do to satisfy our carnal hunger. Sexuality is and isn't this. While sex describes what we do, and to a sense, why we do, sexuality delves deeper into the human psyche. I believe that, of course, sometimes parts of the "human" psyche aren't so human at all.

But to Halperin, sexuality began as the soul of human construct. But does he, himself, believe that this is what sexuality is? That is probably one thing that confused me the most. What he is saying he believes and what he is saying is believed.

Sexuality, according to Halperin, is who you are. But the way we define "who we are" has changed. There was a time it was assigned to you, even forcibly. And times where you grew in to your identity (boys not yet men in Athens, for example). Basically, it used to be that sexuality was the result of some other status in life you held.

What i believe Halperin is trying to say now is that this view of sexuality, the man-made view, is indeed changing. Historically.

But sexuality, at its core, as our nature, as our choice--our fundamental choices--can that change?