When we think about sexuality, we often link it to sexual orientation – which means the gender(s) that we’re attracted to. Although we’ve witnessed an increase in the number of terms that exist, as well as them being more inclusive and diverse, sexual orientation remains a gray area. Typically, it’s tied to gender identity – that refers to a person’s own “sense of self and their gender”, and the gender of those we’re attracted to. But is it really gender? If a cis woman is a lesbian, is she attracted to other women, vulvas, femininity, masculinity? To this day, sexual orientation cannot fully express and encapsulate the rich spectrum of human identities.
And on another note, why is sexual orientation the most valued aspect to consider when thinking and expressing our sexuality? This raises the question if the way that we construct sexual/romantic preferences is adequate for all of the elements that are part of them. This is something that the academic Sari Van Anders addresses in her Sexual Configuration Theory, which is an alternative to thinking or constructing sexuality that maps more dimensions to construct a person’s sexual or romantic interests. In this article, we will go over the main points of SCT for anyone interested in learning an ingenious and fresh way to explore sexuality.
Introducing Sexual Configuration Theory (or SCT)
Sari Van Anders created this theory because she wanted to provide a framework that understood sexuality as something more similar to people’s actual lived experiences. For her, the sexuality of a person includes more aspects than just who we are attracted to and there needs to be room for more fluidness in an individual’s preferences, practices, expression, and anything related to their sexual lives. Not only does this theory propose a different way to express our sexuality, but it also challenges normative talking and thinking.
The key points of this model are that it views sexuality as multifaceted (made up of multiple dimensions), social (where culture will influence experience and meanings), and dynamic (where there is always room for change). In a study done on 242 participants who provided feedback on what they thought of the concepts and diagrams of SCT through an online survey, the respondents found the framework useful for describing themselves. However, some of them found the diagrams of the theory too complicated, something I completely understand, as they are quite complex-looking.
The difference between sexual identity, sexual behavior, and sexual attraction
Sari Van Anders emphasizes that sexual identity, sexual behavior, and sexual attraction are all part of sexuality, but they can be different from one another and shouldn’t all be merged into one category. For example, a person can identify as a heterosexual, but be in a relationship with an individual(s) from the same gender – and perhaps they are allosexual (meaning they experience sexual attraction for others) but are currently in a non-sexual romantic relationship. During a person’s life, the relationship between these three can change. Part of the reason Van Anders created this theory was to convey the beautiful complexities of people’s sexualities. Research by scholars such as Lisa Diamond has reflected how fluidity in sexuality is part of people’s lives and sexual selves.
Sexuality in Solo vs. Partnered Sex
To begin conceptualizing diverse sexualities, Sari Van Anders first distinguishes between partnered and solo sexuality. Sexuality is mostly assumed to be related to activities with other people, but solitary experiences are also part of our sexuality. This reflects that our society views dyadic sexuality (meaning there are two people involved) as more important or valuable than solo sessions, which has all kinds of consequences concerning our beliefs. As she addresses in her article, masturbation is usually seen as the last resort and never as good as partnered sex. But is this true for everyone? Perhaps some people actually prefer to masturbate than having sex with other people, why shouldn’t this be part of their sexuality? We must begin to separate sexuality from necessarily being with others and begin creating more space for all kinds of sexualities — solo or shared.
More dimensions
Concerning partnered sexualities, Van Anders introduces a series of parameters to include in a person’s sexual configuration.
Gender/Sex sexualities
The first is gender/sex. Although she believes this shouldn’t be the only aspect through which we construct our sexualities, when it comes to partnered sex, she includes them as part of the criteria. In SCT, gender/sex sexualities include people who conform to cultural expectations such as binary categories and those who don’t. She views both of them more like a spectrum, where the strength towards the importance granted to gender and/or sex can vary amongst people. She also introduces femininities and masculinities as possible parameters for attraction, where they exist as independent of the gender or sex of the person.
Partner number
Another parameter included is the number of sexual partners that a person likes ranging from none to many. This category grants a space for non-monogamous and asexual identities. It also challenges mononormativity, which refers to societal expectations that assume that everyone wants to engage in monogamous relationships, as well as allonormativity, which assumes that all people experience sexual attraction towards others.
Eroticism and Nurturance
Eroticism is related to pleasure and is different from lust in the sense that lust implies sexual desire and thus excludes those who don’t experience it. Van Anders includes nurturance as an alternative to love, as it doesn’t require as intense of an emotional connection with another person as love does. SCT considers eroticism and nurturance as parameters to consider where the presence or lack of one or both of them influence a person's sexuality.
Any other sexual parameter that is important to a person
Van Anders includes a space for any other kind of sexual parameter that she isn’t explicitly pointing out or including. This provides a possibility for people to give importance to whichever elements they deem as part of their sexual configuration. Examples of this can be any kind of kink, power dynamics in sexual relations, specific traits or practices, the options are infinite.
Intersectionality in SCT
In Sari Van Anders’ work, she includes a section to highlight the importance of including intersectionality in the theory. Intersectionality is a term coined by Kimberlé Crenshaw, that refers to the way that race, class, gender, and other social categories interact and converge with one another — where these influence societal structures, lived experiences, and levels of injustice. In SCT, intersectionality is taken into account in the sense that an individual’s “sexual configuration are not assumed to be isolated from other identity categories.” (p.1188)
A holistic approach to human sexuality
Sari Van Anders’ Sexual Configuration Theory provides an alternative to formulate sexuality through a more complete and inclusive framework. SCT recognizes that sexuality is a unique configuration for every one of us, where recognizing our preferences can help us connect with ourselves and others. By incorporating parameters beyond sexual orientation such as solo sex, partner number, eroticism & nurturance, amongst others, SCT offers a more holistic approach to human sexuality.
This theory can be used to create reflection individually, it can be a tool for therapists working with issues related to sexuality and gender, as well as an amazing reference and source for academic work. Perhaps after learning about SCT, we can reflect on some of the elements addressed by Sari Van Anders and this can help us connect with ourselves and with others.
Written By: Natalia Lozano Casique
Are you destined to lead in the field of sexuality? Find out which SHA certification aligns with your vision! Click here to take the 'Shape the Future of Sexuality: Which Certification Is Your Calling?' quiz and step into your power today.