Cynthia Nixon says she's gay by 'choice.' Is it really a choice?

[Martina]

This is not about Vlasta -- at all.

But i don't think that we should let comments like that stand. It's no different, IMO, from a racist or sexist remark.

It doesn't belong here. We can feel however we feel, but we don't get to say it everywhere.

People can publish their own site or blog or whatever or go to one that hates bisexuals. But that's not us.

[Blue_Daddy-O]

Originally Posted by Kobi

I didnt know "gay by choice" usually means bi or homoflexible. I never heard homoflexible either. What does it mean? Is there a heteroflexible?

Thinking out loud and trying to sort it out in my head....I find questions swirling around up there like..... Is sexual orientation determined by who we choose to fuck at a certain time in our lives or is it something more? What does it mean to Cynthia to call herself gay by choice rather than a lesbian by choice? Is there a difference? If Cynthia and her girlfriend break up, will she simply unchoose to be gay? Or would she be choosing to be ungay Is there such a thing as episodic gayness? If I, god help me, ever decide to have a relationship with a man, does that mean I am no longer a lesbian? Does that make me a hetero?

Is gay by choice different from gay by preference i.e. those who are equally attracted to both sexes but prefer one over the other? Are people in prison who have only one sex to choose from considered gay by circumstance?

How does all this impact gay or questioning kids today? How does it affect any kid who is becoming sexual and experiementing. It confuses the crap out of me and I have been at this for a while now.

Yes, there is now Heteroflexible. All good questions, Kobi.

[Blue_Daddy-O]

Originally Posted by blush

This is not a difference of opinion, to me. Saying you don't like a particular radio station is a difference of opinion. Stating that bisexuals are a threat to queer society (I'm paraphrasing as I understood Vlasta's comment) is going to elicit a strong response. As it should. If this kind of comment was leveled by a right wing minister, would we write it off as a harmless difference of opinion?

Sometimes it feels like we are a bunch of crabs in boiling water trying to climb out of the pot. When one group starts to climb out, they get pulled back down. These types of comments about bisexual people pull all of us down.

Blush, I disagree. For someone to say, "Bi's are harming the Gay Community". ...or "Transgendered people are harming the Gay Community". ...or "Gays are destroying the sanctity of Marriage". ...or "Being Gay is a choice". To me all of those are opinions and opinions can change either by personal experience or a change in perspective by some other mind or heart bending situation. Peoples minds over the decades keep changing, stretching and expanding, in turn creating more acceptance for all of us. And I don't look at any of the statements above as harmless. They can be damaging. And through the carnage, understanding can come. It sucks that mental and emotional battlegrounds exist. Too bad everyone couldn't be born with a knowning of all. Instead we are faced with an existence of educating each other on our differences if we choose to.

[Corkey]

I like facts, 'cause everyone has an opinion. Bi's are no more hurtful than any other segment of the lgBtq spectrum. This site is more open than any other site, and if someone wants to have an opinion that is different than the rest, perhaps they'd best be prepared to back up why they have a particular opinion. I don't tend to hand out passes for opinions which degrade anyones identity.
Me having an opinion.

[Blue_Daddy-O]

Originally Posted by Martina

This is not about Vlasta -- at all.

But i don't think that we should let comments like that stand. It's no different, IMO, from a racist or sexist remark.

It doesn't belong here. We can feel however we feel, but we don't get to say it everywhere.

People can publish their own site or blog or whatever or go to one that hates bisexuals. But that's not us.

If we kicked everyone out that said something that offended us whether it be racist, sexist, ageist, classist, anti-semitic, homophobic, anti-feminist, anti-gay, anti-american, anti-you-name-it-anything, how would we learn from each other and grow as a community? If someone says something and their point of view is challenged and they continue to knowingly go on and hurt others with their words than I can see where that type of a person may get themselves to a point of no return. But until then, I believe give that person a chance to learn. If it's a valid opinion I want to hear it. I would like people to feel safe to voice that opinion even if it isn't a popular opinion. Some of us have the patience to teach.

[Martina]

Who said anything about kicking people out?

Originally Posted by Blue_Vegan_Daddy-O

If we kicked everyone out that said something that offended us whether it be racist, sexist, ageist, classist, anti-semitic, homophobic, anti-feminist, anti-gay, anti-american, anti-you-name-it-anything, how would we learn from each other and grow as a community?

[blush]

Originally Posted by Blue_Vegan_Daddy-O

Blush, I disagree. For someone to say, "Bi's are harming the Gay Community". ...or "Transgendered people are harming the Gay Community". ...or "Gays are destroying the sanctity of Marriage". ...or "Being Gay is a choice". To me all of those are opinions and opinions can change either by personal experience or a change in perspective by some other mind or heart bending situation. Peoples minds over the decades keep changing, stretching and expanding, in turn creating more acceptance for all of us. And I don't look at any of the statements above as harmless. They can be damaging. And through the carnage, understanding can come. It sucks that mental and emotional battlegrounds exist. Too bad everyone couldn't be born with a knowning of all. Instead we are faced with an existence of educating each other on our differences if we choose to.

I hear you. I think we just define it differently. It should always be a choice, not an obligation to educate.

[aishah]

has anyone seen this article?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/29/op...t.html?_r=2&hp

i've been thinking about responding to this thread for awhile but don't feel like i'm in a place yet where i can articulate what i really want to say. but i just saw this on facebook and thought it was really interesting.

[Martina]

Well, i agree that it will be a good day when we don't need the argument -- that we are born this way -- anymore. It will mean we have less need to defend ourselves.

It's hard for me to deny that it's biological though. My first erotic dream was about a woman. My romantic connections with men were ALL emotionally flat. i have been in relationships with bisexual women, and i just don't notice men the way they do. i don't react. That is really the only difference between us. But it is real. I can't imagine feeling what they do. It seems strange to me. Not strange yucky. Just something i can't relate to.

This has nothing to do with my ability to connect with men as friends. But it is pronounced. Undeniable. From the beginning.

[Chancie]

Originally Posted by Blue_Vegan_Daddy-O

If we kicked everyone out that said something that offended us whether it be racist, sexist, ageist, classist, anti-semitic, homophobic, anti-feminist, anti-gay, anti-american, anti-you-name-it-anything, how would we learn from each other and grow as a community? If someone says something and their point of view is challenged and they continue to knowingly go on and hurt others with their words than I can see where that type of a person may get themselves to a point of no return. But until then, I believe give that person a chance to learn. If it's a valid opinion I want to hear it. I would like people to feel safe to voice that opinion even if it isn't a popular opinion. Some of us have the patience to teach.

I have nothing to learn from someone who is "racist, sexist, ageist, classist, anti-semitic, homophobic, anti-feminist, anti-gay, anti-american, anti-you-name-it-anything" and follows it with, and that's just what I believe, too bad.

Except maybe to keep them away from vulnerable children.

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by Chancie

I have nothing to learn from someone who is "racist, sexist, ageist, classist, anti-semitic, homophobic, anti-feminist, anti-gay, anti-american, anti-you-name-it-anything" and follows it with, and that's just what I believe, too bad.

Except maybe to keep them away from vulnerable children.

I tend to see it a little differently.

I prefer a healthy dose of difference. I find when I dont venture out of my comfort zone, I get bored, stagnant, and intellectually rusty.

I also find people who think differently than me have much to teach me. They teach me tolerance which is a huge asset in a very diverse world. They also teach me patience and who cant afford to be more patient. But, most of all, they teach me a lot about the person I am and the person I strive to be.

[Gemme]

Originally Posted by Chancie

I have nothing to learn from someone who is "racist, sexist, ageist, classist, anti-semitic, homophobic, anti-feminist, anti-gay, anti-american, anti-you-name-it-anything" and follows it with, and that's just what I believe, too bad.

Except maybe to keep them away from vulnerable children.

I agree.

The underlined part is what gets me. Yes, we are all free to express our opinions, be they right or wrong or mired in some gray muck inbetween, however, if one cannot take a moment to say, "And this is why...." then not only do I not hold ANY value in what they said (be it a learning experience for me or an opportunity to educate someone who may need it) but it feels like nothing more than shit stirring.

To hone in on the thread topic, I feel Cynthia has the right to love who she wants and to do it in the fashion she wants, but I really do wish she would word things differently. Someone mentioned the 'man boobs' thing and I remember cringing when I heard that. PC, she is not.

[Quintease]

Originally Posted by Kobi

Is there a heteroflexible?

Yes. It's people who have labels, but don't feel the need to restrict themselves because of those labels.

[The_Lady_Snow]

As a Latina Queer Woman I get sick and fucking tired of having to educate peoples ignorant statements... It gets old.. It's not that hard to think before you speak and check your isms at the door.

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by Quintease

Yes. It's people who have labels, but don't feel the need to restrict themselves because of those labels.

Ok but I still am not sure I am understanding what homoflexible and heteroflexible refers to. Are you saying this means someone who is primarily one but may occasionally be the other?

How does homo/hetero flexible differ from the older concept of bisexual? Or is it the new terminology for bisexual?

[WolfyOne]

Originally Posted by betenoire

Well I do like cake as much as the next person, but you are wicked out of line. You're not talking about Arwen, fine. But you -are- talking about me.

In the future I would appreciate it if you would either back your ugliness up or back your ugliness off. Pick one. (Meaning - if you're not prepared to explain or examine your ugliness try and keep it to yourself.)

Is it wrong for someone to express their thoughts without being afraid?
We all have our own opinions and share our personal thoughts.
It doesn't mean we want to get into a pissing contest with anyone else.
Some of us are good at debates and can explain what we mean, others can't.
I personally don't like pissing contests.
We will always agree to disagree or disagree to agree.

I have an ex that once told me, it's not about being with man or woman that defines who she is, it's who she falls in love with. That day, I opened my eyes and actually heard and understood what she was saying. She put no labels on herself because you can't tell the heart who it can or can not love.

For myself, I don't know if I was born this way. I grew up in a society in an era when you were told that marrying a man and having a family is what was expected of women. My dad was a cop, I was not defiant back then because I knew it would only lead to an ass whooping. I can honestly say, I grew up a tomboy, but at 17 was married and by 19 divorced. I was on a 2 year journey trying to figure out why I didn't like sex or being touched by men. A straight friend of mine sat me down with a bottle of wine one night and we talked for hours. She opened me up to a world I never knew existed because I was really sheltered from it as a kid. Honestly, as a kid, I never knew gay existed. Another friend used to call me a baby bitch in the making and I had to have her tell me what she meant. This is part of my journey, this is my story, this is my truth. I wouldn't change the me I became on my journey for anyone. So, was I born this way or was it a choice?

[betenoire]

Originally Posted by Gemme

The underlined part is what gets me. Yes, we are all free to express our opinions, be they right or wrong or mired in some gray muck inbetween, however, if one cannot take a moment to say, "And this is why...." then not only do I not hold ANY value in what they said (be it a learning experience for me or an opportunity to educate someone who may need it) but it feels like nothing more than shit stirring.

Exactly. My new worldview this week really is "back it up or back it off".

Originally Posted by WolfyOne

Is it wrong for someone to express their thoughts without being afraid?
We all have our own opinions and share our personal thoughts.
It doesn't mean we want to get into a pissing contest with anyone else.
Some of us are good at debates and can explain what we mean, others can't.
I personally don't like pissing contests.
We will always agree to disagree or disagree to agree.

As far as I'm concerned, anybody who drops a hateful bomb and then refuses to engage beyond their one-liner is trolling.

[WolfyOne]

Originally Posted by betenoire

As far as I'm concerned, anybody who drops a hateful bomb and then refuses to engage beyond their one-liner is trolling.

Bet, I get what you're saying, but not everyone can put in words why they think what they think. I'm not making excuses for anyone, it's just how some are. Like me, I'm better writing my thoughts than speaking face to face. I don't know why, but it is. I have learned a lot just by reading what others have posted in this thread. My verbal words may come out tongue twisted but my written word is usually pretty darn good. I do think to ask someone why they feel as they do may be a private issue. We all have baggage, just some of choose to check it at the door before we enter a room. If I'm so upset or concerned over what a person posts and they don't want to elaborate in another post, I may want to PM them and ask. I personally have a lot of old baggage I keep locked away. Sometimes someone says something or I read something that brings it to the surface. It makes me think about it, but am leery to talk or write about it. I don't know if any of this makes sense to you, but it does in my mind. I wasn't jumping on you, but I think you already know that

[CherylNYC]

Originally Posted by Kobi

Ok but I still am not sure I am understanding what homoflexible and heteroflexible refers to. Are you saying this means someone who is primarily one but may occasionally be the other?

How does homo/hetero flexible differ from the older concept of bisexual? Or is it the new terminology for bisexual?

Yes, that's my understanding. A gay man who may occasionally dally with women, but whose primary sexual and romantic interest lies with men, may call himself homoflexible. And vice-versa. My understanding is that some people don't like to use 'bisexual' because the word implies that there are two genders.

That said, people just loooove to try on IDs, find them too restrictive, and then demand that the label expand to meet who they feel they are. Once that happens, new labels are invented once again.

[Soon]

"[T]he born-this-way approach carries an unintended implication that the behavior of gays and lesbians needs biological grounding to evade condemnation. Why should it? Our laws safeguard religious freedom, and that’s not because there’s a Presbyterian, Buddhist or Mormon gene. There’s only a tradition and theology that you elect or decline to follow. But this country has deemed worshiping in a way that feels consonant with who you are to be essential to a person’s humanity. So it’s protected. Our laws also safeguard the right to bear arms: not exactly a biological imperative. Among adults, the right to love whom you’re moved to love — and to express it through sex and maybe, yes, marriage — is surely as vital to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as a Glock. And it’s a lot less likely to cause injury, if that’s a deciding factor: how a person’s actions affect the community around him or her." - New York Times columnist

Frank Bruni, on Cynthia Nixon's controversial comments.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/29/op...-not.html?_r=1