The matter of identity- Does identity matter?

The discussion of sexual desire as sexual 'identity' in LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) intellectual and activist circles is something that is argued with rather than argued about. For example, the neo-colonial implications of imposing Western terminology (gay, lesbian, etc) have long been discussed in multiple forums. The same is true for the tension created by articulating purportedly historical Hindu versions of same-sex identities. But in the midst of all of this, to what extent has there been any true engagement with the broader question of whether sexual identity, per se, is socially understandable in Southasia? Is the wider population really thinking about sexual identities, its own or that of others? If not, this would inevitably have far-reaching implications for advancing rights for same-sex relationships within a framework of 'identity'. This line of questioning is well worth pursuing in the current context, when even the act of men and women dancing together can be perceived all over the region as 'breaking down' the moral fabric of society.

For the unassuming woman or man attracted to her or his own sex, to come suddenly into contact with 'the community' and the obtuse pantheon that makes up 'LGBT speak', albeit in English, is rather like learning a new alphabet. Abruptly and unquestioningly, the old human emotion of desire is being discussed as 'types' of people. Sexual behaviours are being elevated to 'lifestyles', and phrases such as 'coming out', 'in the closet' and 'queer visibility' begin to leap out from all directions. What do 'same-sex-desiring' people make of these concepts buzzing around them? More to the point, as these concepts slowly percolate into familiar parlance, what purpose does this terminology serve?