for foucault, it probably was. in his later years, before he died, there seemed to be some shift in his thinking, but i cannot read what he might have evolved into. i want to agree with him, that there is the obvious variety of expressions, understandings, but i do not think it goes all the way down. i think there is something that's just there that we seem to understand and all i can say as with my own experience and maybe your experience, to ask yourself as deeply as you can -- most gay people have had to ask themselves that in a way most straight people have not had to ask -- because it ever had to question their sexuality. sigmund freud was interesting because he thought heterosexuality had to be explained just as much as homosexuality. i do think that in fact, these acts and feelings sexually and emotionally are not just act and feelings. they are, as human beings in nature, acts and feelings that are related to other people and those people are members of two genders. if you are of one gender and attracted to

for foucault, there is no truth and no fundamental nature of human beings. homosexuality, like heterosexuality is entirely a social construction. it's all in our heads. so to talk about homosexuals through history, for example, is to make