Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Is sexual orientation a choice?

441 replies

WidowWadman · 13/06/2012 20:00

Julie Bindel seems to think so.

Is it just me or is that actually fairly offensive?

OP posts:
swallowedAfly · 14/06/2012 16:40

i am guessing namechangeguy that they thought bisexuality was an anomaly and that maybe if there were no societal preferences either way people would be gay or straight. or they could have meant that bisexuality was not fully letting go and being gay or was just experimentation rather than a 'real' sexuality. i have no idea - i'm not psychic but i think of several subtler interpretations than they thought they didn't exist re: they're thick or crazy as you seem to be implying.

why put 'guy' in your name btw?

HmmThinkingAboutIt · 14/06/2012 17:10

If you are bi, you can have a relationship with a man, woman or indeed both, if that suits you...

You don't stop being attracted to one gender just because you are in a relationship with one, anymore than you can stop being attracted to the same sex, if you are in long term het relationship.

If you are bi you choose to be with someone long term because you love them and want to share your life with them. Not because you are proving your political worth. Same as anyone else. I like people for who they are, not whats between their legs, thanks. And I don't go for the over generalised stereotyped "men are this" and "women are that", that article is trying to spew out and reinforce.

Therefore this line IS very offensive. I believed then, and I believe now, that if bisexual women had an ounce of sexual politics, they would stop sleeping with men. as essentially it paints bisexual women who chose a relationship with a man as being traitors to the cause.

So in summary my long, intellectual analysis of that article?

Its UTTER Bollocks

bobbledunk · 14/06/2012 17:30

Her article is stupid, her 'lesbianism' may be a political choice, in which case she must be bisexual if she is able to choose which sex she wants to sleep with, the reality is that most gays and lesbians are just that and don't choose to be attracted to the same sex, they ARE attracted to the same sex. Why would anybody choose the orientation which exposes them to the bullying, abuse and discrimination that many gay people face? It is offensive to those who live in areas where the cultural/religious attitudes of their neighbours make it particularly dangerous to be gay. They're not doing it for politics, they're doing it because they are no more attracted to the opposite sex than us hetros are to the same sex.

The whole basis for the justification of homophobia is this lie of homosexuality being nothing more than a lifestyle choice.

WidowWadman · 14/06/2012 18:25

But what is liberating about restricting yourself, Krumbum?

OP posts:
MiniTheMinx · 14/06/2012 18:46

I believed then, and I believe now, that if bisexual women had an ounce of sexual politics, they would stop sleeping with men

My understanding of the article and this line in particular is that Bindel is challenging the media and a certain way of thinking. The way I am understanding this, is that Bindel is saying that some bisexual women and men are fetishsizing lesbianism and reducing it to an object of titillation for straight people.

MMMarmite · 14/06/2012 18:59

It's a horrible article all round, and pretty incoherent in it's argument.

HmmThinkingAboutIt · 14/06/2012 19:17

The way I am understanding this, is that Bindel is saying that some bisexual women and men are fetishsizing lesbianism and reducing it to an object of titillation for straight people.

No she's saying that bisexual women shouldn't sleep with men as who they sleep with is a political decision and that they aren't committed enough to being non-heterosexual and feminist if they sleep with men. Men are the enemy.

Its you are either with us, or against us attitude. Its got nothing to do with fetishsizing. Its about a 'guilt trip' and suggesting that bi-sexual women are sexual tourists.

Its totally disrespecting the fact that some people just aren't on either 'side'. It seeks to make enemies and MAKE you choose. Why should bisexuals conform homosexual OR to heterosexual norms? Its placing a judgment and a telling you how you should behave. I personally don't feel in one or other camp, and thats not accepted by anyone.

You should respect people for who they are in any sexual relationship and be honest and upfront about who you are. Thats where it begins and ends as far as I am concerned. And there is room to do that and have relationships with both genders, without the need to 'prove' yourself to anyone. Any one you need to do that to, isn't worth respect in the first place anyway, as they can't accept you for who you are.

MiniTheMinx · 14/06/2012 19:28

How can Bindel be homophobic if she is a lesbian?

I don't know if other people make choices, I don't know how conscious we are of our subconscious choices any more than I know what part of my choices are effected by the prevailing norms within society, or what choices are socially conditioned because there is a two way dialectic between choice and outcome.

I don't think Bindel is reducing sexual orientation to just choice but I think she is drawing attention to a very complex two way dialectic between people and their environment.

Even if we accepted that sexual orientation is just a cognitive choice like which pair of shoes to purchase, it still doesn't, in any way make one choice superior over the other.

HmmThinkingAboutIt · 14/06/2012 19:32

She's not homophobic. She bisexualphobic...

She doesn't want to accept that there are alternatives out there, to one binary thing or the other.

But that does seem to be the main problem with too much feminist thinking. Too black and white and too much box ticking.

shushpenfold · 14/06/2012 19:37

Er no....you either like men or women (or both)...can't imagine changing and feel nauseous at the thought!

Krumbum · 14/06/2012 19:41

Widowwadman it is liberating that you don't have to live under the control of men in the same way. But I agree it restricts you and separating ourselves from men is not the answer.
Minitheminx, you can definately be gay and homophobic. Being gay is still seen as an undesirable thing in society and lots of people absorb that even if they are gay. I've been told by gay men that my bisexuality is me being greedy and not making the effort to choose. I have also met gay people who dont think gay marriage or gay people adopting should be legal.

WidowWadman · 14/06/2012 19:44

Krumbum "Widowwadman it is liberating that you don't have to live under the control of men in the same way."

Now I'm completely heterosexual and happily married but I'm certainly not under the control of any man, but in a equal relationship.

The idea that there must be a power differential in heterosexual relationships which wouldn't show in a homosexual one is ludicrous.

OP posts:
StepOutOfSpring · 14/06/2012 19:50

I think gay people can be homophobic, i.e. negative about their own sexuality and that of others.

DM article (sorry!): "I'm a gay man who opposes gay marriage. Does that make ME a bigot, Mr Cameron?" here

breasticles · 14/06/2012 21:17

I'm enjoying this thread, some really interesting points of view. And thanks for the links Ethel.

After saying I wasn't going to rise to it, I can't help myself.

As someone who finds both men and women attractive, and has had long term relationships with both, the article felt quite personal to me. I haven't taken it personally though, I've grown thick skin over the years! Also, the author comes across an embittered imbecile.

I remember as a very young child, 3ish believing that you changed gender back and forth every 3 years or so and I used to say things like "when I'm older and I'm a boy..." I used to have crushes on both girls and boys at school. I had my first 'wet dream' aged 8 or 9 (The original 'Juliet Bravo'Blush) and first sexual experience with a girl aged 11 (although at the time it was innocent and very accidental). As a child, I clearly saw sexuality as fluid, it never felt wrong to have those feeling. It only felt wrong as I got older - there was a lot of open homophobia and calling someone a lesbian as a general insult was extremely common. I didn't feel confident enough to be honest about my feelings so kept quiet and went out with boys, some but not all of whom I fancied. As I got older, and was having lots of awful one night stands with men (not a happy timeSad I realised more and more that I was only really attracted to women.

Coming out as a lesbian was hard at the time but really all okay in the end. I positively identified as a lesbian for about ten years, having 2 long term relationships. I then fell in love with my male best friend. It felt like I had to 'come out' all over again. Reactions from people were so bizarre. So many of my friends made unpleasant comments. These were from lesbians, gay men and straight friends. Unfortunately I really fell out with 2 of them. "So you're bi then?" was a common question. I used to reply "I don't really like such labels, but go ahead, if it makes YOU feel more comfortable about who I sleep with".

I had a ten year relationship with him and he is the father of my 6yo DD. We're not together anymore. I am now perfectly happy skipping along, having random crushes on both men and women Grin and am open to the possibility of a relationship with either. My DD and friends know my past and I'm very conscious of teaching my daughter healthy sexual politics. That's liberating, the fact that I have the right, the choice and the confidence to live my life the way it feels natural to me. To me, that's feminism. The article was the opposite of all that. To suggest to anyone, that they can't sleep with a person of their choice is abhorrent. I remember a long time ago being on the receiving end of something similar from a group of similar minded people to the author, who argued that lesbians shouldn't be having penetrative sex with each other! wtf!

Oops, sorry for the waffle

Devora · 14/06/2012 21:56

Back in the 80s, I used to sometimes hang out with Julie Bindel. She was scary then and she's scary now Grin

I don't know, it's one thing staying true to your radical politics - my views haven't changed all that much in 30 years - but it's important to grow in compassion and wisdom too. There was loads of sectarian nonsense going on in feminism in the 80s - and across the Left, actually - and much of it has been left behind, so it does surprise me when this anti-bi stuff crops up. I don't understand it and it angers me: it's so, um, obvious and purist and bullying.

There are loads of areas where my political analysis comes into conflict with my values: transgender is one, surrogacy another. Political analysis is important, but always less important than living your life by your values, I think: being respectful of others, open to new ideas, accepting that we may be wrong and all have much to learn.

I was writing that mainly because breasticles' post made me angry (for her, not with her). But also because I'm slightly peeved at the posters who have dismissed those of us who feel there is an element of choice in our sexual orientation. And this is not just about political lesbianism: I am not a political lesbian (in that sense: I am, obviously, both political and a lesbian). I didn't choose to be a lesbian in the way I choose a job, or where to live. But I think my sexuality was formed by a range of factors, possibly including being partly born that way. Am I a lesbian because I was raised with absolutely no positive role models of happy heterosexual relationships? Am I a lesbian because my early heterosexual experiences were troubling and difficult, or were they troubling and difficult because I am a lesbian? Did my feminism allow me to explore lesbian relationships from a position of pride and affirmation, rather than shame and guilt?

My openness to these possibilities (as well as my femme experience) has sometimes led to people accusing me of being some kind of faux lesbian. That really pisses me off, especially when it comes from people too young to even remember what it was like to come out in 1983. But whatever, after 30 years I feel confident enough in my sexuality to be upfront about this. I'm not claiming this is a majority experience: I know that the vast majority of gay men are convinced they were born that way, and I respect that. Far fewer lesbians feel they were born lesbian (though most probably still do). Of those that don't, I doubt political lesbianism is a big factor. I think it's more about acknowledging the layers of social conditioning, opportunity, personality etc that motivate our sexual choices. We need to talk about this in a more detailed and thoughtful way. And not just lesbians, but heterosexuals too.

Devora · 14/06/2012 21:57

Sorry, that was very long Blush

Devora · 14/06/2012 21:57

Oh, and when I said 'femme experience' I meant 'femme appearance'. Though both work equally well Grin

EclecticShock · 14/06/2012 22:20

Devora, I really liked your post.

garlicbum · 14/06/2012 22:37

it's one thing staying true to your radical politics ... but it's important to grow in compassion and wisdom too.

Thank you so much for posting that, Devora :)

swallowedAfly · 15/06/2012 07:12

devora great post.

that's my issue with bindel i think. she may have great politics etc but compassion and wisdom DOES seem to be lacking imo and i guess like you i value those things as much if not more than politics. why hurt a load of women? that article clearly was going to be hurtful to bisexual women. reading breasticles post effected me too and solidified what i felt about the article. sometimes you have to tell the truth that hurts a group because another group is being really damaged by not doing so (i'm thinking of trans issues here) but in this case who are bisexual women really hurting?

i do think these kind of oppressive ideas about sexuality from both sides have effected me adversely. to the point where even at 36 i wrestle with the idea that i must be either gay or straight - i'm supposed to be able to pigeonhole something that for me really isn't that simple. i've never liked labels or binaries - it's just part of who i am - i hate filling out questionaires of either/or type questions because the truth is always 'it depends' or sometimes this and sometimes that or this but only because x, y and z has happened otherwise it might have been that. itms!

i think julie bindel could definitely do with an injection of compassion and consideration for her fellow women. i'm sure she's done great work but as a journalist i find her dubious - it's her job to be contentious and upsetting and in that sense i feel the media uses her to further mock and belittle and present as extreme and daft feminism and lesbianism. i can't help but judge using that platform to hurt women.

Beachcomber · 15/06/2012 08:08

Great post Devora. I think what you say about gay men feeling they were born gay and lesbian women not all necessarily feeling that way, is a really interesting point.

I think all too often people class gay men and lesbian women in a box marked 'homosexuality' when in fact the two ways of being are very different.

And the two happen in an entirely different context. Also let's face it - male homosexuality is much less taboo still, than female lesbianism. The existence of lesbianism challenges the status quo in a way male homosexuality does not.

Beachcomber · 15/06/2012 08:15

It reminded me of this bit from Ethel's Adrienne Rich link;

I have chosen to use the terms lesbian existence and lesbian continuurn because the word lesbianism has a clinical and limiting ring Lesbian existence suggests both the fact of the historical presence of lesbians and our continuing creation of the meaning of that existence I mean the term lesbian continuum to include a rangethrough each woman's life and throughout historyof woman-identified experience; not simply the fact that a woman has had or consciously desired genital sexual experience with another woman. If we expand it to embrace many more forms of primary intensity between and among women, including the sharing of a rich inner life, the bonding against male tyranny, the giving and receiving of practical and political support; if we can also hear in it such associations as marriage resistance and the "haggard" behavior identified by Mary Daly (obsolete meanings "intractable," "willful," "wanton," and "unchaste" "a woman reluctant to yield to wooing")45--we begin to grasp breadths of female history and psychology that have lain out of reach as a consequence of limited, mostly clinical, definitions of "lesbianism."

Lesbian existence comprises both the breaking of a taboo and the rejection of a compulsory way of life It is also a direct or indirect attack on ~male right of access to women But it is more than these, although we may first begin to perceive it as a form of nay-saying to patriarchy, an act or resistance It has of course included role playing, self-hatred, breakdown, alcoholism, suicide, and intrawoman violence; we romanticize at our peril what it means to love and act against the grain, and under heavy penalties; and lesbian existence has been lived (unlike, say, Jewish or Catholic existence) without access to any knowledge of a tradition, a continuity, a social underpinning The destruction of records and memorabilia and letters documenting the realities of lesbian existence must be taken very seriously as a means of keeping heterosexuality compulsory for women, since what has been kept from our knowledge is joy, sensuality, courage, and community, as well as guilt, self-betrayal, and pain.

Lesbians have historically been deprived of a political existence through "inclusion" as female versions of male homosexuality. To equate lesbian existence with male homosexuality because each is stigmatized is to deny and erase female reality once again To separate those women stigmatized as "homosexual" or "gay" from the complex continuum of female resistance to enslavement, and attach them to a male pattern, is to falsify our history Part of the history of lesbian existence is, obviously, to be found where lesbians, lacking a coherent female community, have shared a kind of social life and common cause with homosexual men But this has to be seen against the differences women's lack of economic and cultural privilege relative to men; qualitative differences in female and male relationships, for example, the prevalence of anonymous sex and the justification of pederasty among male homosexuals, the pronounced ageism in male homosexual standards of sexual attractiveness, and so forth In defining and describing lesbian existence I would hope to move toward a dissociation of lesbian from male homosexual values and allegiances I perceive the lesbian experience as being, like motherhood, a profoundly female experience, with particular oppressions, meanings, and potentialities we cannot comprehend as long as we simply bracket it with other sexually stigmatized existences just as the term parenting serves to conceal the particular and significant reality of being a parent who is actually a mother, the term gay serves the purpose of blurring the very outlines we need to discern, which are of crucial value for feminism and for the freedom of women as a group.

namechangeguy · 15/06/2012 10:02

SaF - I don't think the survey takers are 'thick or crazy'. I highlighted it because it makes absolutely no sense at all - still, that makes it consistent with the rest of the article.

People should be respected regardless of whether they want to have a relationship with men, women or both. It is nobody else's business.

The tone of the article puts me in mine of George W's 'if you aren't with us, you are against us' speech, and we all know what an intellectual powerhouse he was. I don't know much about the author, but it did occur to me that perhaps she is the radical feminists version of Clarkson. It seems to be in vogue at the moment for journos to write stuff that provokes without anything to prop their point up other than personal opinion, just to get publicity.

My screen name was random because I couldn't think of anything else at the time.

HotheadPaisan · 15/06/2012 10:14

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

HmmThinkingAboutIt · 15/06/2012 10:20

'if you aren't with us, you are against us' is a propaganda technique.

Pure and simple.

I despise propaganda being used by feminists. It weakened very good and very valid arguments ultimately. Propaganda is used most by those who can not argue their case on a fair playing field and need to try and manipulate people to achieve their desired goals.

Progress is made by consensus, not distorting the truth.

Swipe left for the next trending thread