My friend Christina send me this article from The Atlantic and it got me thinking. I have to admit, I've never fully felt on board with the whole "born this way" as an argument for gay rights. My reservations have mostly come about because I think stating it that way simplifies sexuality into something binary - either you're gay or you're straight - and I don't think that's the way it works. I suppose that's why the letter Q seems to have found its way into the alphebet soup (LGBT) used to describe those who experience something other than pure heterosexuality (whatever that is). It makes me wonder what it would be like to have lived 100 years ago when these terms and labels and categories didn't really exist, at least not like they do today. It's nice be able to categorize and label things, but I think it's too often used as a tool to separate others who aren't like us and see them as less than. I think all these labels also serve to limit what we can understand about who we are and how we experience our sexuality.
The author of the article doesn't like the "born this way" argument because she believes that it shouldn't matter whether she was born that way or chose to pursue her attraction to women by having a same sex spouse. She says that to her, by using that argument, it sounds like we are saying that if I could, I would be different but I can't. In the end, it shouldn't matter if it's purely genetic or choice or some mix of things we don't yet understand. People should have the right to be with who they want to be with. I get that and I agree with her.
But then I also kind of groan inside, because she talks about how for her it has been a choice. She seems to experience a much greater degree of fluidity or flexibility in her attractions than I do. She says she has dated both men and women and has felt and can feel enough attraction to men that she could probably make marriage to a man work. My groaning comes because I think of the people who will read that who aren't able to see nuance, and who might project her experience onto others (like me) who don't experience the same degree of fluidity or flexibility and say, "See! It is a choice!"
I enjoyed her brief exploration into how a same sex marriage challenges traditional gender roles and how those roles operate in a heterosexual marriage. There are those who would identify this challenge as a threat to "traditional" marriage. I think that this challenge provides a helpful contrast though. I think the differences in the dynamics of a same sex marriage could challenge traditional gender roles in a helpful way that could actually strengthen heterosexual marriage. (As an sidenote, I think it's entertaining when people feel the need to identify who is the man and who is the woman in same sex relationships.)
What about you? What do you think about the article?
(Oh, I also found the Homosexuality in Perspective study to be interesting as well.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"If I were terrified of the stigma associated with homosexuality, it would have been easy enough to date men exclusively and stay in the closet my whole life."
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure I believe her assumption. It sounds like a friend I had many years ago who once said that it was great to be gay just because it was so "cool." Almost like we were just riding the wave of this awsome fad.
I kind of think she's fooling herself.
I have always been on board with the "born this way" idea because I know I was, but like you and her I find it to be irrelevant when discussing rights. Religion is a choice and yet the religious still enjoy a plate full of rights.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I'm not even uncomfortable with the idea that some men and women DO choose homosexuality. I just know I didn't.
I dated a guy who claims he never had a homosexual urge until he divorced his first wife and was just flexible enough to experiment. He found it preferable to his straight relationships... and now identifies as gay. I think he's definitely the exception, but why shouldn't he be as right as I feel like I am? There are probably billions of variations of sexual orientations.
i suppose this is kind of off topic, but kind of on topic, a little. in the sence that its about nuance and gender labels. anyway for a long time i wondered if i was bi/queer, not because i really had ever had feelings for a woman, but because i wasnt sure i hadn't and maybe they wouldnt feel differnt than feelings for a man, and i didnt really date alot, and sometimes people would say that too me and things people say are always true. it just because this weird thought. well i have this great boyfriend, and i told him that about it, and we talked it out, and ended up figuring it out. and i'm not bi. actually it reminds me of something you told me once about your feelings for women: "the thought of being with a woman, in an intimate way, makes me physically ill" and i realized thats how i feel too, and i dont need to freak out about it because even if i was attracted to woman, i love my boyfriend. and theres labels, and what people think, but people always need to find something to pick through and categorize, and if its not me, its you, and if its not you its someone else. as a society, its slowly something we have to overcome, and as individuals, we need to stop, so we can stop contributing to that group mentality :)
ReplyDeleteI dislike the born this way argument for the same reason as the author: it shouldn't matter if you choose to be gay, you should still be protected.
ReplyDeleteI also dislike it because one day science will have progressed far enough that we can choose the sexuality of our offspring (I am, however, doubtful that we will ever be able to change the sexuality of those living--that's my domain and it's not really possible...though it could be). The born this way argument will then be completely ineffective.
For me, it reflects a step in the right direction for society to accept the LGBT(Q!) community, but can't be a the final step. That and I've heard some effed up things justified by being born a certain way.
Good article. I find myself agreeing with the author's main point about "born this way" being a poor reason for granting rights.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the commenters above for the most part--I think there are all different kinds of sexual "orientations." This will all be addressed someday; I always thought of the binary classification most people work from today is more just a crutch until people CAN conceive of more nuance. It's hard to be accepting of a full range of sexuality if you can't conceive of the existence of "gayness" as we label it now.
I can see how it might be empowering to argue that "I chose this."
ReplyDeleteBut if I "chose" to be gay, I must have chosen it before this life. Which I think is eminently possible... But I'm pretty sure I didn't choose it in this life.
I'm sure some people (who are much more bisexual than I am) do experience relatively equal amounts of attraction to both men and women. Good for them! Twice as many choices for a date, as Woody Allen says.
But I've only ever been attracted to men. Except Tina Turner. I was attracted to her once.