Diversity without Division

How sexuality is expressed and understood is variable across cultures. We live in increasingly pluralistic societies, which poses challenges for individuals, families, communities, clinicians, and policy-makers. This challenge is further compounded by the lack of a clear, evidence-based framework(s) to guide decision-making.

​

Unfortunately, most diversity models presented today are based on post-modern academic philosophies and political strategies which deny that material-reality matters, and is a constant linguistic game of moving goal posts. Concepts like "gender is a spectrum" and "there are 100 genders" are taught, which are not evidence-based and, when mandated, tend to frustrate and divide families and communities. The needs of sex-nonconforming people are not truly met by postmodern politics. Sex-based rights are being compromised in ways that are causing demonstrable harms to girls and women, in particular. The post-modern goal of division is counter to my goal for sustainable and meaningful relationship development - with respect to the cultures in which people are situated, and with respect to the safety and dignity of all members of society. 

​

I do not use a postmodernist approach. In my work, I rely on scientific evidence about sexual orientation and sex non-conformity. It is my view that clinical, social and health policies regarding sexual orientation and sex non-conformity when well informed by material reality and scientific consensus, improves the wellbeing of both individuals and communities. Relationship building through improved understanding of diversity, and shared responsibilities to one another - rather than imposed coercive political positions -  is a healthier, more sustainable approach.