The paper I have chosen to pose an argument to is, “what is sexual orientation?” By Robin A. Dembroff. The idea of basing someone’s sexual orientation on the dispositions they come across in life is unrealistic and non-logical. This is because these dispositions come from experience in life and the society we live in while in those experiences. It is not their true desire, but rather a chosen desire. Starting off the paper, we have an example that shows the unfairness of this ideal of sexual orientation. In the passage, it says “a match is disposed to light (i. e., is flammable) in response to being in a certain circumstance if and only if, were the match in that circumstance, it would light” (page 1). This wasn't a huge red flag for me on the first read, but after further reconsideration, this is flawed. In this way of thinking,…show more content… What does this mean to me? This means that in the case of the prisoner who on the outside was heterosexual but went in and underwent a change in sexual identity, it was either always a secret desire suppressed by the societal norm of heterosexuality, or a compromise they made to fulfil their sexual needs, making it not their true sexual desire. I view this scenario the same way I view someone settling for someone who they don’t find the most attractive, but for their own sexual benefit, they have sexual relations with them. It isn’t necessarily fulfilling a desire but satisfying a desire with what’s available. In the passage it states “social psychologists have discovered that sexual desires frequently increase or decrease (depending on other characteristics of the individual) in situations with high sexual opportunity”(15). This correlates with how people will settle with the available sexual opportunities and not following their true sexual desires. Another ideal I don’t agree with in the reading was Choi’s opinion on
