|
|
|
May 12, 2010
What is gay? Mind if I ask?
Amidst the hubbub over Elena Kagan's sexuality (or lack thereof), there's a question which isn't being asked by anyone, which I would call the question about the question. What is gay? Think it's easy to define? I'd be willing to bet that if you polled most people, their answers would vary. Even the readers here might give different answers to the following questions: The point here is not to grind an axe or start an argument, but to point out the difficulty posed by asking whether someone is gay. There's a long Wiki post about the term, and the closest thing to an actual definition seems to come from the American Psychological Association: "Sexual attraction, behavior and identity may be incongruent. For example, sexual attraction and/or behavior may not necessarily be consistent with identity. Some individuals may identify themselves as homosexual or bisexual without having had any sexual experience. Others have had homosexual experiences but do not consider themselves to be gay, lesbian, or bisexual. Further, sexual orientation falls along a continuum. In other words, someone does not have to be exclusively homosexual or heterosexual, but can feel varying degrees of both. Sexual orientation develops across a person's lifetime-different people realize at different points in their lives that they are heterosexual, bisexual or homosexual."[20]So what does that mean? Is whether someone is "gay" to be determined by the individual, or by others? Who gets to decide these things? Isn't that relevant? At some point, a certain number of people make the decision to call themselves gay, or acknowledge to themselves that they are. So in that respect, it's like deciding that you're a member of a certain church, or an atheist. Or is it more like being Jewish, where you're born with the "Jewish-ness" whether you believe in the religion or not? I'm one of those people who believes in maximum individual freedom, and I come down against the strictly determinist view of these things, and while I do think some people are "born that way," it is wrong as well as tyrannical to insist that all are. Allowing self definition to be the only definition, though, is problematic, because just as people can say they are straight and be lying, people can also say they're gay and be lying (as was alleged in the case of a Philadelphia politician who said he was gay). But even there, what and where is the lie? While we would normally think of it it as a lie for someone to not do what he says he does do, or to do what he says he does not do, in cases involving inner thoughts, how is this to be determined? Is a bisexual person gay? If so, if gay includes bisexual while straight does not, is that not both illogical and hegemonic? Could a celibate person legitimately claim to be gay? Or bi? Or straight? Or have such people by being celibate forfeited all claims to having a sexuality? Again, who gets to decide what these people are, and what it is that constitutes honesty or dishonesty? And how? Are we to literally invade their minds? So "Are you gay?" is a very easy question to ask. But what is being asked is not so easy. Damned if I know. What I do know that simple logic -- and simple fairness (if that matters in politics) -- dictate that the question "What is gay?" ought to be settled before the "Are you gay?" question is asked. MORE: Please note that in light of complaints, the poll was revised to include an additional choice: Being exclusively homosexualThat would probably not describe many of those who consider themselves gay. My apologies to those six people who already answered! Please feel free to answer again. (I think this illustrates the difficulty of the question, though.) posted by Eric on 05.12.10 at 10:24 AM
Comments
Yeah, that would be the one I'd pick. John S. · May 12, 2010 11:10 AM OK,I'll add it now! With apologies to the five or six people who answered so far! Eric Scheie · May 12, 2010 11:12 AM Bear in mind that the added choice would disqualify a number of gay men (and perhaps even more lesbians) from being allowed to call themselves gay. Complicated. And now that I have added that, I'm wondering whether it should say "Being exclusively homosexual, and having always been exclusively homosexual." Eric Scheie · May 12, 2010 11:25 AM I consider my brother gay, so does he. But now he's 50 and has been with the same guy for 15 years and, since he was around 22 or so, he's been with men exclusively. People who screw both sexes are "bi" so far as I'm concerned. Again, I long for the day when this is not an issue, but it is and not least because of gay activists. Eh, if it's not color, creed or sexuality people will still find a reason for others to be The Other. Veeshir · May 12, 2010 12:33 PM "Being primarily sexually attracted to persons the same gender" seems the best definition I can come up with. (And bisexuals would thus be those attracted to persons of both genders without either one being primary.) I can't imagine that sexual activity could be definitional, as virgins almost always (just as people who have had sexual congress) know what they want in a sexual partner. Sigivald · May 12, 2010 02:38 PM The crux of the near-universal disdain of homosexuality is the threat that active, visible homosexuality poise to the reproductive success of one's own offspring. A poor or middle class parent makes their biggest investment in the future by having and raising children. the goal is the propagation of their genes. Having your kids "turned" to an exclusive homosexual relationship is a real threat to your investment. That's why DADT was a reasonable compromise. I'm happy enough if they just stay back in the closet. Start making the moves on my children and you'll have pushback. Since homosexuality has a genetic component, its rates in a society reflects the degree to which it is expressed in successful bi-sexuality. Evolutionary science is still working on the problem. Whitehall · May 12, 2010 04:40 PM I can't imagine why it would matter to anyone except the person involved and those contemplating a romantic relationship with them. Okay, so I prefer if my friends tell me in advance to avoid awkward moments when they show up at the party with a same-gender partner (though this is only an issue when partners' have certain names.) Other than that, it's their business. So... why would the question be asked at all? Sarah · May 13, 2010 05:52 PM The Wiki writer is an idiot, especially with the bit about "sexual attraction and/or behavior may not necessarily be consistent with identity." The very interesting thing, to me, is that very nearly everyone in this thread -including the author- focused on sexual attraction & relationships. Ok, Sarah is the lone exception just above my comment. :) First point: orientation is not related only to sexuality, but emotional relationships. This is frequently ignored in public discussions. Second, the original post relates more to confusion & sloppy thinking instead of orientation. It's not that complicated. A man who is physically & emotionally attracted to other men is a homosexual. A woman who is physically & emotionally attracted to other women is a lesbian. Both are now colloquially referred to as "gay." Someone who is attracted to both sexes (and one presumes is capable to romantic relationships with either) are considered "bisexual," although it's not always a 50/50 split. Veeshir provides an excellent example. The percentage varies widely according to the individual. Heterosexuals -just in case someone out there is still confused {g}- are men or women who are physically & romantically attracted to the opposite sex, and are deemed "straight." In summary, we have the homosexuals, the heterosexuals, and the in-betweens (famously referred to in Kinky Boots as "those of you who haven't made up your minds yet"). "Gay" colloquially refers to people with a same-sex orientation. Now, was that hard? It's not my fault so many people can neither think clearly nor comprehend the English language. There's going to be some smarta$$ who will object "but what if they're 99% gay and 1% straight?" Easy. Strong gay orientation with rare flashes of hetero-experimentation. Same thing with straight people who got drunk one night, did something they most likely won't discuss with anyone else, ever. Casey · May 21, 2010 01:27 AM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
May 2010
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
May 2010
April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• More minimalist Puppy Love
• A Scientist In Congress? • What About My Profits? • Everybody Draw Muhammed Day • Voluntary compliance is for your own good! • Some accidental shootings are just the breaks! • Running better, on next to nothing! • The Conservative Position • We still have the Constitution, right? • Seven years! (And they said it wouldn't last!)
Links
Site Credits
|
|
Why didn't you have the option "You are attracted exclusively to members of your own sex"?