Queer by Choice, Not by Chance: Against Being 'Born This Way'

That has to be one of the stupidest articles I've ever read. Um, lady, you're bi.

 

If there were a like button on this site, I would've had totally hit it on that. In that article she basically described that she was more attracted to women then men...

Although, I do think that sexuality does change over time, so I can agree with that part.

 

You'll see a lot more of this claim over the years as homosexuality itself isn't demonised.

Think about it, the central point of her claim is that the "born this way" excuse doesn't make homosexuality any less valued.

 

Oh, I saw that point. She thinks women is a better choice for her because then the duties of her and her partner aren't forced into societal gender roles, or something like that (and a lot of her points about that stuff was pretty inane). And so even though this is her "choice", to be with a same sex partner rather than opposite, she still believes that she should have full rights in the partnership. Of course she should.

But her key statement in the article:
"In direct opposition to both the mainstream gay movement and Lady Gaga, I would like to state for the record that I was not born this way."

The fuck she wasn't. She's bi. She's queer. By chance. Born that way. Or does she want the LGBT rights movement to simply drop the "B", because after all, they have a "choice"?

 

I think she has a legitimate point, that gay people are entitled to respect regardless of why they are gay, however, she makes it in a most inarticulate way. She is totally bisexual and does a great disservice both to anyone in the queer community who does have her "choice" of the gender of their partner. I also find this really problematic because it is appearing in a mainstream publication, and I think it is very easy to misread this article if you are not attuned to the experience of being gay, especially for people who only read the first few paragraphs.

 

"born this way" is not an excuse though. This seems to be more a person mislabeling themselves as gay when they are bi, than anything else.

 

I really like Autostraddle's post about, and subsequent discussion of, this article: Autostraddle — On What It Means To Say You Were Born This Gay

As someone who believes that not all (though probably most) queer people were born that way, it is refreshing to hear a different point of view. But I don't think she always chose the best way to express herself and I don't agree with everything she says.

As a sidenote, saying "well, she's bi" when she hasn't chosen to identify herself that way isn't really fair. I dislike biphobia and bi erasure as much as the next person, but I fully support anyone's right to choose not to use a particular label for whatever reasons they may have. Deciding how to identify oneself is a personal choice and not something that should be imposed by others.

 

yet she has admitted to being attracted to men, just that she is more attracted to women. thats is Bisexuality. she may skew more towards women, but for her to devalue the scientificly supported, but never scientificially disproven reality that sexuality is an aspect of a person that they are born with because she 'choose' to only act upon one specific sexual attractive over another is foolish in full.

it is that she devalues and mocks people who acknowledge the testable and proveable reality of 'born this way' is irrelevant to her choosing to date only women, while acknowedging that she is attracted to men, even if at a disproportanate level to her stronger attraction to women.

She technically has not invalidated 'born this way'. she didnt choose her sexuality, she choose which aspect of her sexuality to act upon.

it does the world no good for her to mock and devalue the known reality that sexuality is something you are born with.

 

Ugh, I've come across "political lesbians" before. They hate men and see lesbianism as a way to rebel against the patriarchy. I'm sorry, but lesbianism does not work that way. It's like they never got past the "ew, boy cooties!" stage of sexual development. -_-

 

I agree that, in her case, this is true:

And I agree that her choice of words and argument was not supportive of those who do feel they were born with a fixed sexual orientation. But it is NOT a "known reality" that ALL people are born with a fixed sexual orientation. When you say that, you are just as much imposing your experience and worldview on others as she is imposing hers on you.

There are people, many of them, who believe that their sexuality has changed over time. Not that they chose for it to change, or that they had any control over who they became attracted to. But that it changed. It was not the same as it was when they were young. They didn't have any of the clues or suggestions or repressed feelings that others report. Thus, they were very likely not born that way. Just because this experience is not everyone's, and may be rarer than most, does not mean it is not valid.

That is not up to you to decide. The term "bisexuality" is misrepresented, misused and misunderstood by so many people that I don't think you, or anyone, has the authority to define what it should mean for someone else. I myself am also capable of being attracted to men and women. But I do not use the term "bisexual" because the way most people understand it, it does not appropriately convey my reality. It is MY choice to label myself the way I want to. Not yours or anyone else's. And whether or not you agree with what this woman has to say, it is also not your right to label HER something she has not chosen for herself. Disagree with her points, by all means. Make your arguments. But find a way to do so that respects her autonomy in identifying herself.

 

i was under the impression that a bisexual was someone who was attracted to both genders. where is the loophole that makes thats innaccurate?

She made a choice, but that choice was not what her sexuality was.

her arguement technically invalidates itself because she doesnt actually make any choice to be a certian way... she only choose how she would act upon her sexuality, not her sexuality itself.

 

I'm not sure you are understanding the point of what I am saying. If someone identifies themselves as bisexual, then of course, you are free to assume they are attracted to both genders and to use that term to describe them. It is not inaccurate for that person.

But there is a lot that the word "bisexual" does not explicitly make clear. To what extent is someone attracted to each gender? On what levels (physical, emotional, romantic, etc.)? Does this person feel a continual attraction to both genders at all times, or fluctuate between one and the other? If so, how often? Does this person feel the need to have sexual relationships with both genders, or are they happy to settle down with one or the other?

Because these things are not made clear by the term "bisexual", many people make their own assumptions. These assumptions can be things like, "bisexuals are always equally attracted to both sexes at all times", "bisexuals need both a girlfriend and boyfriend to be satisfied", "bisexuals can't be trusted in a relationship", "bisexuals are greedy", "bisexuals can't make up their minds", etc. etc. etc. etc.

Thus, people very reasonably often choose not to identify themselves with this label, because for them, although the bare definition may be at least partly accurate, the common assumptions and connotations are not, and the word does not appropriately convey their reality and their experiences. So if this person chooses not to identify herself as bisexual, it is fairly ignorant of other people to insist that she is.

As I made clear above, I do not disagree with this statement.

And again, I never said I agree with everything she says. I don't think she has a very strong argument here either. However, that does not invalidate some of the other very important points that she has made (namely that not all people are born with a fixed sexuality - whether she herself was is not really the point - and that gay people should have rights because it is inherently right, not because they can't help it).

 

I very much agree.

 

My thought is she's bi, but it doesn't really matter how or why she wants to be with a woman. I know I was never taught to like dudes, but yet I do.