(Untitled)
Salon has an interesting article on the ex-gay movement. (Yeah, you need to watch a few seconds of an ad to see the article, but it's worth it if you're at all interested in the subject, really.) It treats it both in depth and more fairly than most coverage that I've seen has done. I think it's flawed, but for all that, it's pretty well done
( Read more... )
Yeah, that's it exactly.
As to whether one's permitted to say that they're bisexual and in denial - well, sure, you're permitted to say anything you'd like to say. :) My personal feeling is that I refuse to name anyone else's sexuality in general, and make an effort to accept someone's self-identification WRT sexuality* no matter how illogical it sounds to me. So if you tell me you're straight even if you're a girl who's happily married to another girl... hey, you know, whatever. All the terminology we have out there is somewhat flawed and imprecise anyway, and if for you "heterosexuality" means something other than "having sex with the opposite sex", I'll let you go on your merry way. It just seems invalidating and non-respectful to tell someone they're not what they tell me they are. So I feel sorta the same way about saying ex-gays are bisexual and in denial, even if I do personally believe that that's one way of approximating the likely truth - that because they obviously have the potential to experience a visceral attraction to the same sex, but they choose to suppress that attraction and focus their attraction on the opposite sex, they are by definition capable of feeling attraction to both sexes and are therefore "bisexual". But it's a label, you know? None of the labels really work that well IMO.
Incidentally, I didn't thank you for your comment about wishing you could get me published, but that's because I forgot; I was really, really flattered by that comment. Also incidentally, I say "incidentally" waaaaaaaay too often.
*WRT is the netcronym of the day. Say it with me, folks! W-R-T! WITH-RESPECT-TO! W-R-T! Uh yeah, I've gone 'round the bend, don't mind me.
Reply
I was being silly, but not entirely - if they get to announce politely at the outset that they would like you to change, well, hey, so do you to them. Of course, I don't think my suggested formulation is "polite," which is where the silly came in; obviously you'd be entitled to something more along the lines of "just so *you* know, I think most people are bisexual, and so I am equally here to discuss options with you if you decide to defect from The Movement."
Otherwise, absolutely, the only logically consistent conclusion of wanting one's own wishes respected about identifying one's sexuality is to do the same for others. I was actually trying to say that later on, and I apologize if the joke sidetracked that discussion - because I do think it's utterly critical to point out that this really, honestly IS another example of respecting someone's self-definition. If you [general] would never dream of telling the woman who slept with boys until she realized she was gay and still enjoys the occasional mindless shag with a guy that she's "not really a lesbian," then you also have to grant the ex-gays their right to call themselves "ex-gay" without pouring vitriol over them.
Reply
I seem to be misreading everyone's comments lately. I suck.
Reply
sometimes, as much as "our side" hates to admit it, open-minded liberals who can be just as unrelentingly nasty about choices that they disagree with. (And, as with the kids thing, it often seems to be those for whom someone else's choice is seen as an attack on their *own* choice.)
Reply
Leave a comment