Bisexuality is often regarded as a "third gender" or an identity that lies between homosexuality and heterosexuality.
This view fails to consider the complexities of human sexuality and its fluid nature. Bisexual individuals do not experience their sexuality in such binary terms, but rather see themselves as existing on a spectrum of desire and attraction that extends beyond male/female binaries. In this essay, we will explore how bisexual critique can unveil the moral violence of categorical purity, which is based on the assumption that there are clear-cut boundaries between different forms of sexual orientation and gender expression. We will examine the concept of bisexuality through the lens of Michel Foucault's theory of power and knowledge, as well as Judith Butler's theory of performativity, to show how these frameworks can help us understand the ways in which society constructs categories of sexuality and gender.
Michel Foucault argues that power operates through discourse, and that the construction of social reality is always mediated by language and power relations. He suggests that power exists in the relationships between people and institutions, rather than in individual bodies. This idea can be applied to the way in which we discuss and understand bisexuality. By creating a dichotomous understanding of sexuality - either you are straight or gay - we perpetuate the notion that there are two distinct and separate identities. This binary system places pressure on those who identify as bisexual to choose one side over the other, leading to feelings of inadequacy and confusion. This power dynamic creates an atmosphere where bisexual individuals are seen as indecisive or untrustworthy, while reinforcing traditional gender roles and heteronormative ideals.
Buter's theory of performativity further expands on the notion of gender and sexuality as socially constructed identities. She argues that gender and sexuality are not innate characteristics, but rather performative acts that are constantly being enacted and reenacted in everyday life. According to this framework, gender and sexuality are not fixed categories, but rather fluid and flexible identities that are shaped by cultural expectations and norms. In order to understand the moral violence of categorical purity, we must consider the ways in which our society encourages us to police our own identity and others'.
Bisexual women may face criticism for their sexual orientation due to the belief that they are "confused" about their true desires or lack of commitment to either men or women. Similarly, transgender individuals may be excluded from certain spaces based on their appearance or behavior that does not align with their assigned gender at birth.
Bisexual critique can provide a valuable lens through which we can examine the ways in which social norms and institutions shape our understanding of sexuality and gender. By exploring the complexities of human desire and attraction, we can challenge the binary systems that perpetuate inequality and oppression. Bisexual critique calls upon us to question the assumptions we make about sexuality and gender, and to recognize the fluid nature of these concepts. Through this critical lens, we can begin to unveil the moral violence of categorical purity and create a more inclusive world where all forms of sexuality and gender expression are recognized and celebrated.
How can bisexual critique unveil the moral violence of categorical purity?
The concept of "categorical purity" refers to the idea that individuals must be exclusively heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual, and that any other sexual orientation is considered abnormal or wrong. Bisexual critique, on the other hand, challenges this binary view by arguing that sexuality exists on a spectrum and that it cannot be neatly divided into distinct categories.