Philosophical analysis challenges traditional views of sexual orientation, proposing a broader understanding based on stable attractions.
Philosophical concepts of sexual orientation understand it in terms of sex/gender‐based attraction. I argue that this lacks proper justification by rejecting seven reasons given in its support. I defend the broader “General Concept”: One's sexual orientation consists of those sexual attractions that are stable and important to one's psychosexual identity. I explain and defend these two conditions and then provide six reasons in support of the General Concept. I conclude with a possible world in which our concept of sexual orientation is age based so as to clarify how our current concepts of sexual orientation are products of our contingent history.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Raja Halwani (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: