Is sexual orientation a choice?

[WidowWadman]

Julie Bindel seems to think so.

Is it just me or is that actually fairly offensive?

The beginning of your Adrienne Rich extract pissed me off straight away, Beach:

... to embrace many more forms of primary intensity between and among women, including the sharing of a rich inner life ...

The author appears to be redefining 'lesbian' to mean "having close, loving relationships with other women, regardless of whether sex is involved".

Come off it! We need a word for women who prefer having sex with other women, and we've got one. What would you call women's best female friends (who aren't lovers), if you decide to call them all lesbians?

As a side issue, I've met a few lesbians who do a very good impression of despising women in general.

Rewriting the dictionary doesn't solve anything, just makes things harder to understand.

I do find the 'i know some lesbians who are mean to women' thing iffy.
This is lesbian feminism,rather than an analysis of the innate wonder of all lesbian women everywhere.
It's philosophy - the way we could be. The way some of us want to be
That doesn't automatically translate to every one of us being perfect all the time
It's useful for many radical lesbian feminist women. It can't be expected to resonate with everyone.

So let me make this perfectly clear so everyone understands it.

Its ok for radical lesbian feminists to generalise and say X about bisexual women or say X about men. However it is not ok to say X about lesbians because radical lesbian feminists are 'different' and it can be justified as they are individuals who aren't perfect all the time and should be treated as individuals rather than as part of a collective. Because its a 'useful philosophy'.

No. Its a bullshit excuse to discriminate and use propaganda against other groups, whilst expecting privilege and respect to be returned in unequal measure to that given.

Completely counterproductive...

You loose as much respect as you might otherwise gain unfortunately.

So is it acceptable for one oppressed minority to denigrate another oppressed minority?

Sometime you have to stand up and say that someone is wrong, no matter how much store you put by their previous work, and regardless of their standing within a community.

Ethel, I took issue with Rich's proposal that all women who love other women are 'lesbians'. She appears to redefine lesbians as women who love, understand and care about women, therefore it seemed appropriate to point out that ime some lesbians don't much like women in general - so don't share the female connectedness Rich was talking about.

If you want, for some reason, to redefine lesbianism as "women who feel an empathetic connection to other women" then you would need yet an other repurposed word to describe "women who have sex with other women but don't feel that connection" - which looks to like a massive waste of effort.

This was my only reason for making that remark.

I only read the first few posts, but I wanted to share my experience in a space I won't be judged or forced into a labelled box.

I am bisexual with a 75% lean towards women. However, when I met my DP (male) although was crazy about him, sexually I knew it couldn't be as great for me as it is with a woman. I CHOSE to be with a man because I want a family, and no one would ever allow me to adopt with my mental health. :( I'd always wanted to adopt an older girl from China..:(

Anyway, DP and I have wonderful sex and a connection I've only ever felt with women before, the sex is amazing and I couldn't be happier. I CHOSE to be with a man, but I am certainly not straight. I could find the exact happiness I have with DP with a female (and probably a lot easier..There are only two men on this earth I trust and love besides DP) I just chose not to.

I won't be sharing this story when I'm fighting for equal rights obviously...

OK, Lurking, yours is a story that enemies would try to use against you. But I don't see that it in any way compromises your right to fight for gender parity.

I'm happy for you :)

I wrote this wrongly:
yet an other repurposed word to describe "women who have sex with other women but don't feel that connection"

Should have been more like "women who have sex with other women, regardless of whether they are 'women-identified women'"

You aren't expected to be perfect to expect acceptance.

Can I phrase it this way:

If you don't have respect, no matter what group you belong to, you have to have an understanding of how to win respect and change stereotyped and inaccurate perceptions.

Imagine the scenario in the playground. A new girl comes along and she don't know anyone. She's an outsider. She not going to get friends by standing in the middle of the playground and shouting "why does no one play with me" and just generally slagging everyone else off.

She might be right that the kids look at her funny and make judgments cos she's wearing the wrong clothes and is uncool and they don't want to hang out with her cos they are afraid of what the other kids might say. It might be simply because they are a bit shy or unsure of her as they don't really know what to expect as they've heard that people who come from X Town eat pet dogs and cats.

But the other kids aren't going to make the effort or break from the main groups because she stands there accusing them of being cat killers simply because they are from Y Town. It just pisses people off and makes them not want to engage or change their perceptions.

It might not be fair, but its a basic understanding of knowing how you can change people opinions.

If you act in a way that alienates others from you, not only does it isolate you, but it also has the effect that the next new girl gets treated in the same way but with even more lack of willingness to try include her, because the kids all think "you remember the last new girl". And thats before they know anything about the second new girl at all. Conversely, if the first encounter had been a positive one, maybe the kids in the playground might rush up to the second new kid with open arms.

Ultimately, rightly or wrongly, how the outsider acts has an enormous influence on the main group, and it is up to them to realise this and to actually make the effort to engage with the group with a positive approach rather than a wholly negative one from the word go.

You can change opinions and people will be more responsive if you take a positive approach. Political leaders and those with influence within their community need to be more aware of this than anyone else. Julie Bindel fails miserably at this.

Deliberate separatism and deliberate slagging off others, reaps what it sows and frankly just makes you look like you've got a huge chip on your shoulder to anyone else outside the community.

And tbh, when Julie Bindel says

Those of us who grew up in a time and context where there was a political analysis of sexuality were able to make a positive choice to be a lesbian. I believed then, and I believe now, that if bisexual women had an ounce of sexual politics, they would stop sleeping with men.

she's doing playground politics by saying

You can't be in MY gang if you hang out with HER.

She COULD however make a point about lesbians feeling used by some bisexual women under certain circumstances. She is a writer and not a daft one at that. She has clear understanding of how to use language and make an argument.

But instead she resorts to manipulation and guilt trips rather than making a good case for the prosecution. Classic case of style over substance.

So not only am I a whore who only likes girls to get male attention (yes, apparently I am that pathetic.. ) I'm also a traitor to lesbians because I chose to be with a man.

I can't win!

HotheadPaisan
Its not about trying to do everything 'fitting' in. Its about having a positive rather than negative approach. Its about how you communicate in the best possible way.

I think its very much about making the same arguments but being conscious about how others will respond to that based on the way you do it. If you can't make good solid arguments then you've not got an argument in the first place.

You can be confrontational in certain circumstances, but you need the argument and the evidence to back it up. Its an approach to be used wisely and infrequently, and not all the time.

That article has nothing in it, apart from pandering to the reputation that Julie Bindel has for being controversial and says nothing to anyone outside her community. There is no evidence, no clear explanation. Just an attack on others.

It ends up damaging her, because those people she could persuade on other subjects, won't bother to read other articles by her. It will enhance her reputation within her community amongst those who feel the same. Not very helpful. It does very little to actually change anything or truly challenge anything.

Does it matter if its an excerpt? Thats still 200 words without actually saying anything apart from blowing a lot of hot air, insulting people and using propaganda.

Like I say. No content. No argument.

Why use nothing else but propaganda techniques through the piece then?

One after another.

At a quick glance I can see the following techniques:
Appeals to prejudice
Appeals to fear
Black and White Fallacy
Ad hominem attacks
Demonizing the enemy
Glittering generalities
Labeling
An attempt at Milieu control
An attempt at trying to obtain disapproval for bisexual behaviour
Oversimplification
Stereotyping

I think there are a couple more in there too. Not bad for a 200 word piece.

Further thoughts:

There is this horrible stereotype that women don't really like sex (remember Stephen Fry's comments), we aren't sexual beings, we only engage in any kit off activity to get things from men.

This is a crap and harmful stereotype in many ways and I think the concept of political lesbians is just extending it to lesbians by removing/ obscuring the fact that being a lesbian means you really, really like having sex with women. Political lesbianism seems to shed that in favour of some emotionally laden form of separatism.