Is homosexuality identity or

behaviour
by Aidan Campbell

FILE

12397_AIDAN_CAMPBELL_IS_HOMOSEXUALIT Y_IDENT IT Y_OR_BEHA

VIOUR_192690_2040636526.DOCX (123.98K)

T IME SUBMIT T ED

12-APR-2016 12:49PM

WORD COUNT

SUBMISSION ID

55614278

CHARACT ER COUNT 37528

7782

Is homosexuality identity or behaviour

GRADEMARK REPORT
FINAL GRADE

GENERAL COMMENTS

62

Instructor

/100

I appreciate that you submitted several draf ts of

this. T he ef f ort has paid of f in many regards.
I still think you can get rid of phrases like By
using methods of analysis of course this is
what you will be doing in an essay. T hese are
f ound throughout your work and they detract
f rom the points you are making.
You have done a better job of def ining identity
and behavior through Halperin (although I still
f ind his terms clearersometimes it is worth
using the vocabulary of the critics).
Unf ortunately, you change your def initions and
the subject of your debate when you get to the
innate section af ter the plays. You can f urther
see this shif t when you actually claim, in your
Why it Matters section that sexuality is
subjective. T his was precisely the way you were
distinguishing between behavior and identity
earlier in the piece. You need to keep the terms
consistent once you def ine them. Now that you
do have a clearer def inition, the inconsistencies
are more apparent.
T he discussion of the plays remains strong and I
see more connections to the theoretical intro
now than I did in the f irst f ew reads.
As always, you do a nice job of reading the critics
f or us.
What this work does well: Aidan, this dissertation
displays a great deal of care f or your subject
matter. Your reading list covers a good selection
of texts and your chosen case studies of f er the
potential f or some interesting analysis. T here is
also a politics to the works you have selected
and your own argument. Halperin of f ers a
particular notion of gay identity as capitalism's
dream and Angels in America has deep seated
institutional critiques in both f orm and content.
Your structure has the potential f or a well
organised piece of work. You do work towards
making an argument.
Areas f or improvement: Firstly, there are many
grammatical errors running through your work.
You f requently misuse apostrophes and your
sentence structure can be conf using. Your
integration of other people's work and
arguments can be rather clunky and it is
sometimes unclear whose argument belongs to

who (you or the quoted scholar). I am not totally

clear/convinced about your use of the two terms
that underpin this dissertation. Behavior and
identity are not necessarily mutually exclusive in
relation to gender or sexuality. You write as
though they are opposed. On page 5 you raise
the negative connotations f or considering
sexuality as behaved but you don't ref er to any
of the plentif ul resources that productively
consider the perf ormativity of gender. Your
reading and understanding of Halperin's claims
needed more work. A hard task, yes, but
necessary. I don't think he marks
behavior/identity as opposed to one another. His
critique of gay identity neither negates nor
privileges behavior. Later on in your discussion
of Boys in the Band you make a point about
behavior and multiplicity, that the multiple
behaviors of men in the play negates the claim
that sexuality is behaved. T o make a claim that
sexuality is behaved is not to claim that behavior
is singular. In f act, in Boys in the Band we see the
characters share various ritual behaviors. And we
see them dif f er in their own perspectives on
love/sexuality/relationships. Your analysis of
Michael and Donald is contradictory: you claim
that they are both products of nuture and driven
by an innate nature! Your analysis of both plays
would have benef itted f rom considering their
f ormal qualities (Brechtian/Realism). T he overall
drive of your argument needed f urther
consideration and clarif ication.

PAGE 1
PAGE 2
PAGE 3
PAGE 4
PAGE 5
PAGE 6
PAGE 7
PAGE 8
PAGE 9

PAGE 10
PAGE 11
PAGE 12
PAGE 13
PAGE 14
PAGE 15
PAGE 16
PAGE 17
PAGE 18
PAGE 19
PAGE 20
PAGE 21
PAGE 22
PAGE 23
PAGE 24
PAGE 25
PAGE 26
PAGE 27