Halwani R
School of the Art Institute of Chicago, IL 60603, USA.
J Homosex. 1998;35(1):25-51. doi: 10.1300/J082v35n01_02.
Social constructionism is the view that homosexuality is not an atemporal and acultural phenomenon. Rather, homosexuality exists only within certain cultures and within certain time periods, most obviously Europe and North America after the nineteenth century. Essentialism is the view that homosexuality is an essential feature of human beings and that it could be found, in principle at least, in any culture and in any time. In this paper, I argue that the historical evidence available to us does not show that social constructionism is the correct view, and that essentialism is fully compatible with such evidence. Furthermore, I argue that the historical evidence does not even render social constructionism more probable than essentialism, i.e., both views are equally probable in the face of this evidence.
社会建构主义认为，同性恋并非一种不受时间和文化影响的现象。相反，同性恋仅存在于特定的文化和特定的时间段内，最明显的是19世纪之后的欧洲和北美。本质主义认为，同性恋是人类的一个基本特征，并且至少在原则上，它可以在任何文化和任何时期被发现。在本文中，我认为我们现有的历史证据并未表明社会建构主义是正确的观点，而且本质主义与这些证据完全兼容。此外，我认为历史证据甚至没有使社会建构主义比本质主义更有可能成立，也就是说，面对这些证据，这两种观点的可能性是相等的。
