De Cecco J P, Shively M G
J Homosex. 1983;9(2-3):1-26. doi: 10.1300/j082v09n02_01.
The article has three major purposes. First, it adumbrates four contexts within which the discourse on sexual identity has been carried on: the historical, bisexual, homosexual, and biological. Within these contexts sexual identity has been conceived in three general forms: the biological, psychological, and socio-cultural. The biological form is the most basic since all conceptualizations of sexual identity make the biological sex of partners in sexual relationships the criterial distinction. Second, the article addresses problems that have arisen in each of the contexts: the uncritical use of popular concepts and explanations of sexual identity, the incorporation of unacknowledged moral judgements, and the misapplication of the scientific method. Third, it identifies conceptual, methodological, and moral advantages in redirecting the discourse on sexual identity so that the focus of inquiry is on sexual relationships: (a) The focus is shifted from isolated individuals to their mutual associations. (b) Social scientists could conceive of sexual relationships in other than biological terms or metaphors. (c) The shift would capitalize on the advantages of the psychoanalytic method (the exploration of personally constructed meanings) and symbolic interactionism (the identification of socially constructed meanings) while avoiding the pitfalls of relying on one of these approaches to the exclusion of the other. (d) The shift would allow investigators to view sexual relationships from the vantage point of a morality of individual choice rather than a traditional morality of externally imposed obligation.
本文有三个主要目的。其一，概述了关于性身份认同的讨论所产生的四种背景：历史背景、双性恋背景、同性恋背景和生物学背景。在这些背景下，性身份认同被归纳为三种普遍形式：生物学形式、心理学形式和社会文化形式。生物学形式是最基本的，因为所有关于性身份认同的概念都将性关系中伴侣的生理性别作为关键区别。其二，本文探讨了在每种背景下出现的问题：对性身份认同的流行概念和解释的不加批判的使用、未被承认的道德判断的纳入以及科学方法的误用。其三，它指出了在重新引导关于性身份认同的讨论时在概念、方法和道德方面的优势，以便将研究重点放在性关系上：（a）重点从孤立的个体转移到他们的相互关系上。（b）社会科学家可以用生物学以外的术语或隐喻来构想性关系。（c）这种转变将利用精神分析方法（对个人构建意义的探索）和符号互动主义（对社会构建意义的识别）的优势，同时避免依赖其中一种方法而排斥另一种方法的陷阱。（d）这种转变将使研究者能够从个人选择的道德观而非外部强加义务的传统道德观的角度来看待性关系。
