Unanswered Question of the Day: What is a gay person?
4. This is an inverse example of #3: instead of having lots of definitions with no one word, we have lots of words with no one definition.
Epidemiologists dispense with notions of desire, and instead use MSM and WSW to identify men and women who have sex with men and women, respectively.
Within the MSM category, however, there is variation. I've encountered straight men who only want to have sex with other straight men, and I've encountered gay men who only want to have sex with other gay men. To top it off, there are straight men who will have sex with gay men, and vice-versa.
There is a look, voice, and posture associated with homosexuality in culture. Some straight men exhibit these qualities and are presumed gay, whereas some gay men don't exhibit these qualities and are presumed straight.
The gay rights movement seeks to do away with presumptions, and allow people to identify themselves however they choose. There is a problem, however, as an element of the gay rights movement seeks to discredit opponents by investigating their secret homosexual behavior. Other elements of the gay rights movement seek to justify homosexuality in biological terms, especially to the end that it is unchangeable.
This last point is interesting to me. There are people who have gay desires who do not want to have gay desires. How do we classify such people? Likewise, there are people who have straight desires who do not want to have straight desires. How do we classify them? The answer seems to depend on who you ask. A gay person might say someone is "in the closet," or that they are denying their true self. But a straight person might say that they have identified a flaw in their character, and are taking reasonable steps to correct it.
Likewise, there is an argument about whether or not a gay person must declare their sexuality publicly. Gay rights proponents regard coming out as critical to gaining acceptance. For many gay people, however, coming out is not a positive experience. They face exclusion from their families and their communities. Gay advocates would counter that there is a gay community ready to welcome such people, but that may not be the community these people would want to be a part of.
To muddy the waters further, there are extremists who believe that any evidence of gay persuasion is enough to label a person gay. And there are gay people who take any indication of straight persuasion as enough to exclude someone from being gay. Such extremism might suggest a sexual motivation. In the same way that a straight man might be aroused by persecuting a presumed homosexual, perhaps a gay person could be equally aroused by doubting the veracity of a gay-identified person they presume to be heterosexual.
Biology, meanwhile, remains silent. It seems everyone is equally capable of expressing gay or straight desires. If you put a person in prison, they are more likely to express gay qualities there than they were on the outside. Brain studies have documented homosexual arousal in straight people, and heterosexual arousal in gay people.
Perhaps, however, we should separate romantic love from sexual arousal. Clearly these are already separate in all orientations, but they could also separate along lines of orientation. For example, being sexually aroused by women, but romantically attracted to men. What do we call this?
In the end, the question may come down on the scale of tolerance. Should we be a more tolerant society, or a less tolerant one? Should we be more diverse or more uniform? What is progress?
Epidemiologists dispense with notions of desire, and instead use MSM and WSW to identify men and women who have sex with men and women, respectively.
Within the MSM category, however, there is variation. I've encountered straight men who only want to have sex with other straight men, and I've encountered gay men who only want to have sex with other gay men. To top it off, there are straight men who will have sex with gay men, and vice-versa.
There is a look, voice, and posture associated with homosexuality in culture. Some straight men exhibit these qualities and are presumed gay, whereas some gay men don't exhibit these qualities and are presumed straight.
The gay rights movement seeks to do away with presumptions, and allow people to identify themselves however they choose. There is a problem, however, as an element of the gay rights movement seeks to discredit opponents by investigating their secret homosexual behavior. Other elements of the gay rights movement seek to justify homosexuality in biological terms, especially to the end that it is unchangeable.
This last point is interesting to me. There are people who have gay desires who do not want to have gay desires. How do we classify such people? Likewise, there are people who have straight desires who do not want to have straight desires. How do we classify them? The answer seems to depend on who you ask. A gay person might say someone is "in the closet," or that they are denying their true self. But a straight person might say that they have identified a flaw in their character, and are taking reasonable steps to correct it.
Likewise, there is an argument about whether or not a gay person must declare their sexuality publicly. Gay rights proponents regard coming out as critical to gaining acceptance. For many gay people, however, coming out is not a positive experience. They face exclusion from their families and their communities. Gay advocates would counter that there is a gay community ready to welcome such people, but that may not be the community these people would want to be a part of.
To muddy the waters further, there are extremists who believe that any evidence of gay persuasion is enough to label a person gay. And there are gay people who take any indication of straight persuasion as enough to exclude someone from being gay. Such extremism might suggest a sexual motivation. In the same way that a straight man might be aroused by persecuting a presumed homosexual, perhaps a gay person could be equally aroused by doubting the veracity of a gay-identified person they presume to be heterosexual.
Biology, meanwhile, remains silent. It seems everyone is equally capable of expressing gay or straight desires. If you put a person in prison, they are more likely to express gay qualities there than they were on the outside. Brain studies have documented homosexual arousal in straight people, and heterosexual arousal in gay people.
Perhaps, however, we should separate romantic love from sexual arousal. Clearly these are already separate in all orientations, but they could also separate along lines of orientation. For example, being sexually aroused by women, but romantically attracted to men. What do we call this?
In the end, the question may come down on the scale of tolerance. Should we be a more tolerant society, or a less tolerant one? Should we be more diverse or more uniform? What is progress?