Descriptive or Divisive? A Critical Review of Scholarly Perspectives toward Monosexism

Abstract

Dichotomous views of gender and sexuality primarily categorize people according to opposing binaries – either those attracted to the ‘opposite’ sex (heterosexual people) or those attracted to the same sex (gay or lesbian people). This ‘either/or’ notion greatly stigmatizes people who exist outside of this binarized categorization due to their attraction, or lack thereof, to multiple gender identities as well as the non-binary nature of their own genders. Past scholars have coined the term ‘monosexism’ to describe the social and cultural structures that operate on the premise that all individuals experience attractions, and that all are (and should be) attracted to no more than one gender (Eisner, 2013; Meyer, 2019; Roberts et al., 2015). Hence, asexual, bisexual, pansexual, and other plurisexual people experience oppression rooted in the normativity of monosexuality, while heterosexual people, lesbians, and gay men–all who adhere to the societal norm of monosexuality– receive privileges. While the impacts of monosexism are evident in the literature (Kaysen et al., 2011; Walters et al., 2013), there are scholars (Hemmings & Blumenfeld, 1996; Weiss, 2004) who oppose using the term monosexism and its presumed monosexual categorization – denoting it as pejorative and divisive to the 2SLGBTQIA + community as it groups lesbians and gay men together with heterosexual people as the oppressing, monosexual group. With the increasing scholarly focus on representation and recognition of 2SLGBTQIA + individuals and communities, we contend that understanding the complexity of monosexism is important for a more clearly articulated analysis of gender and sexuality-based inequality and experience. This paper provides a critical review of scholarly perspectives discussing monosexism and at the same time, contributes to a fuller understanding of the nature of this system of oppression and discrimination. Overall, we suggest that comprehending monosexism as a neutral term to describe a social structure that oppresses all sexual identities (not just asexual and plurisexual people) can lead to better understanding and potentially to resisting and dismantling this form of oppression.

Keywords:

• Monosexism
• monosexuality
• bisexuality
• asexuality
• plurisexuality
• bisexual erasure
• sexuality-based oppression
• LGBT community
• sexual privilege

Disclosure Statement

The authors declare there is no Complete of Interest at this study.

Notes

1 We are aware of other researchers’ choice to avoid the term ‘non-monosexuality’ and ‘non-monosexuals’ because of the way it linguistically privileges monosexuality as the norm (Bollas, 2023; Galupo et al. 2017; Mitchell, 2014). Hence, for the same reason, we also opt to use the term plurisexual for the rest of this paper to discuss people who experience attraction to multiple genders. Our use of plurisexual is intended to be inclusive of various sexual orientations (i.e. bisexual, pansexual, non-binary, and genderqueer identities).

2 That is, a gay man is, by definition, a man attracted to men–this monosexual categorization rests upon the dichotomous and fixed gender of both the object choice and the subject.

3 Furthermore, monosexist norms of attraction to only one gender contribute to homonormativity, that is, the creation of ‘acceptable’ gayness that mimics the shared monogamous, monosexual attributes of heterosexual culture (see Duggan, 2002; Richardson, 2005 among others).

4 Meyer (2019) opted to use non-monosexuality (instead of plurisexuality) to denote

all sexual orientations that exist outside of the heterosexual and lesbian/gay male dichotomy (i.e. bisexuality, pansexuality, asexuality, and queerness). However, as mentioned earlier, we prefer to avoid the term non-monosexuality, instead we use both separately and together, plurisexuality and asexuality.

5 Gray asexuality represents the gray area between sexuality and asexuality, wherein these individuals may only exhibit sexual attraction on certain occasions.

6 Demisexuality includes individuals that experience sexual attraction only after forming a strong emotional or romantic connection with a another person.

7 Indeed, monogamy is a central structure maintaining patriarchal, heteronormative, and homonormative structures (see Anderson & McCormack, 2016; Duggan, 2002; and more seminally, Rich, 1983 for example). The significance of the spectre of non- monogamy that plurisexuality poses in both straight and gay and lesbian contexts is yet another example of monosexist assumption/stigma.

8 A modern research methodology utilized to understand the connection between discrimination and mental health among minority groups such as women, BIPOC, and 2SLGBTQIA + groups more extensively

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Nel Jayson Santos

Nel Jayson Santos, MA (he/him) completed his Master of Arts in Sociology at Memorial University of Newfoundland and is currently working as a Senior People and Culture Administrator and Employee Communications Coordinator at Connective Support Society – a community-based social service organization that provides person-centered programs and services to marginalized communities across British Columbia and Yukon, Canada. Nel’s research interests include Filpinx-Canadian migration studies, discrimination and oppression against the 2SLGBTQIA + community, gender conversion therapies, and international student experiences.

Ailsa Craig

Ailsa Craig, PhD is a Full Professor of Sociology and Special Advisor to the President (Continuing Education) at Memorial University of Newfoundland. Dr. Craig is a cultural sociologist with interests in cultural economies, gender and sexual diversity, and inequality. Dr. Craig’s is also a co-founder and co-chair for Quadrangle NL, a charitable organization which has launched the first 2SLGBTQIA + community center for the province of Newfoundland and Labrador.