An Integrative Paradigm

Abstract

Through the application of life course theory to the study of sexual orientation, this paper specifies a new paradigm for research on human sexual orientation that seeks to reconcile divisions among biological, social science, and humanistic paradigms. Recognizing the historical, social, and cultural relativity of human development, this paradigm argues for a moderate stance between essentialism and constructionism, identifying (a) the history of sexual orientation as an identity category emerging from the medical model of homosexuality in the late 1800s; (b) the presence of same-sex desire across species, history, and cultures, revealing its normality; (c) an underlying affective motivational force which organizes sexual desire within individuals, and (d) the assumption of a sexual identity in response to the identity and behavioral possibilities of a culture. This framework considers the biology of sexual desire while simultaneously acknowledging the socially constructed nature of identity and the historical foundations of sexual orientation as a meaningful index of human identity.

Gay Men’s Identity Development in the Twenty-First Century: Continuity and Change, Normalization and Resistance

“…For gay, lesbian, queer, and other sexual minorities, historical context matters deeply in the lived experience of human development, for life course possibilities have generally been severely constrained by laws and cultural ideologies that have privileged heterosexuality and denigrated (even criminalized and pathologized) same-sex desire [Hammack, Mayers, & Windell, 2013]. A life course theoretical perspective posits that gay men's development will vary across generations, as social and historical change alters the way in which they interpret and experience their same-sex desire [e.g., Cohler, 2007;Hammack, 2005;Hammack, Frost, Meyer, & Pletta, 2018]. As I engaged with the narratives in Savin-Williams ' [2016] text, I considered issues of continuity and change in gay men's development across generations.…”

Narrating Self-Identity in Bisexual Motherhood

“…Nevertheless, our ability to track processes was limited by data collection at a single point in time and participants' identity projects will necessarily evolve with subsequent changes over the life course. As Hammack (2005) has suggested prospective longitudinal research would effectively track well-being and identity.…”

“…According to these premises, bisexuality was perceived as transitional or as a form of unachieved or immature identity (Barker & Langdridge, 2008;Fox, 1995). Longitudinal studies and reviews examining self-identity have pointed to considerable variation in the ways in which individuals identify as non-heterosexual and to variation over the life-course, particularly in how women define a fluid sense of their own sexual identity (Diamond, 2008;Hammack, 2005;Peplau & Garnets, 2000).…”

“…Following these perspectives, various authors have called for an integrative understanding of human sexuality acknowledging complex pathways and self-identification (for example, Barker & Langdridge, 2008;Fox, 1995;Hammack, 2005). Galupo (2011) has pointed to the unique position of bisexuality in exposing the quandary posed in reconciling self-identification and social classification, the former being inherently psychological and the latter being embedded in social definition.…”

“…Personal characteristics, immediate social interactions, subcultural, and predominant historical contexts provide arenas and meanings through which the self is interpreted and reinterpreted (Hammack, 2005;). Self-definitions in particular are mediated by the social meanings assigned by families as family is at the interface between private and public worlds (Bengtson & Allen, 1993;Elder, 1998).…”