The emergent definition of sexuality over time is difficult to accurately depict. The majority of the historical accounts of sexuality are
inherently limited as a result of the societal frameworks from which data had been interpreted. For example, homosexuality has both been documented as representing an illness (see Spitzer, 1981) and a crime, perspectives which have impacted on how this aspect of sexuality has been understood and reported upon across the literature. When exploring the timeline of sexuality research, the nineteenth century appeared to mark the beginning of the modern study of sexuality. At this time the topic of sexuality was largely dominated by the medical model approach which focussed on sexual health. As a consequence, most of the sexuality research completed during this period had a physical or biological focus and had been conducted by physicians. This medical dominance was continued into the mid-twentieth century until Alfred Kinsey’s research into human sex and sexuality marked a pivotal point in sexuality history and prompted the exploration of the topic which went beyond that of a moral or medical understanding (Bullough, 1998). Kinsey’s research focussed on obtaining behavioural accounts of sexual practices (see Kinsey, Pomeroy, & Martin, 1948; Kinsey, Pomeroy, Martin, &
Gebhard, 1953). While Kinsey’s work was revolutionary in the history of sexuality research, the term ‘sexuality’ was positioned as being interchangeable with, and equivalent to sexual behaviour. Some researchers continue to conflate sexuality with specific acts of sexual behaviour. In these instances, sexuality appears to be most
commonly cited to refer almost exclusively to sexual orientation (for example, Briddock, 2014; Sit & Ricciardelli, 2013). Langer’s position that “sexuality refers to an individual’s self-perception of being
1617 4218227 13451640 Thesis Volume 1 Page 50 attractive as a sexual partner” (2009, p.753) provides another
example where the term is understood as relating to sexual acts.
Behavioural accounts of sexuality provide some insightful descriptors of how sexuality can be enacted. However, they are limited in that they fail to provide any account of how or why these various
behaviours may occur. Furthermore, it is widely acknowledged that an individual’s beliefs and context will inform how their sexuality may be enacted. For example, religiosity has been cited as a determinant of sexual behaviour. Orthodox Judaism, traditional Catholicism and traditional Protestantism have been found to be alike in their
condemnation of masturbation, abortion, homosexuality, and
premarital and extramarital coitus (Hogan, 1982). On this premise, research perspectives which only examine observable behaviours arguably fail to provide the full understanding of sexuality required to make sense of individual experiences.
Sexuality has not always been cited as a term which is
synonymous with sexual practice or behaviour. In contrast, many modern researchers have defined sexuality as a symbolic term which is representative of a number of much broader biopsychosocial
concepts. These constructs of sexuality present the term as being a collective of ideas, rather than as relating to specific aspects of human behaviour. For example:
“Sexuality is a very individual concept that cannot be easily defined or categorized and which includes feelings, values, beliefs, and experiences related to one’s sexual preferences. It is expressed within a context of communicating with an “other”, as well as personally expressing oneself as a sexual being.”
(Redelman, 2008, p.367)
1617 4218227 13451640 Thesis Volume 1 Page 51
“Sexuality is an essential human characteristic that includes social, emotional, and physical components.” (Ayaz, 2012, p.3)
“Sexuality is a broad multi-dimensional construct which encompasses relationships, romance, intimacy (ranging from simple touching and hugging, to sexually explicit contact),
gender, grooming, dress and styling.” (Bauer, Fetherstonhaugh, Tarzia, Nay, & Beattie, 2014, p.1)
These definitions propose the use of the term as a multifaceted concept which goes beyond accounts of sexual practice.
When exploring the development of the definition of sexuality, the meaning of the term across the literature appears to depict
sexuality as being along a continuum. At one polar end, authors refer to sexuality as the description of observable sexual acts and coital relationships. Literature which portrays sexuality in these terms often links sexuality with categoric descriptors (for example,
homosexual, heterosexual, bisexual, or asexual). At the other end of the continuum, sexuality is described by social constructionist
accounts which position sexuality as a complex and individual phenomenon which is influenced by social norms, culture, and personal experiences (Laws & Schwartz, 1977). The ambiguous nature of ‘sexuality’ and its changing meanings across the literature make it difficult to synthesise findings. Furthermore, the lack of a clear and consistent definition of sexuality amongst researchers poses a barrier in terms of theoretical understandings of sexuality.
Therefore, existing research on sexuality is either atheoretical or reflects the application of disciplinary theories which have been modified to include sexuality (Goettsch, 1989), and much needed clarity is required regarding the use of terminology in this area. Due to the uncertainly of the constituents of the term ‘sexuality’ across
1617 4218227 13451640 Thesis Volume 1 Page 52 the literature, as a research team we intentionally abstained from endorsing a specific definition and instead opted to include
understanding participants’ interpretations of the word as part of our research aims. However, it is acknowledged that the researcher’s prior values, beliefs, and interpretations can influence research findings and therefore biases cannot be entirely prevented (Jootun, McGhee & Marland, 2009). Therefore, while a definition of sexuality for the purposes of this research has not been specified, for further information regarding the lead author’s position regarding defining sexuality please refer to section 4.2.10.