Big Changes
13 years ago
queeritude because we can
Here's the deal: The big question in a lot of queer related debates is whether or not being queer is a choice. And to be honest, that question is the wrong question to be asking. It's not even really relevant and it's not actually as helpful as people think it is. So let's break this down and understand what's really going on with this question and why it's such a useless question, especially in terms of convincing social conservatives to our side.
So first, let's assume queer folk are born that way. Alright, so we've not chosen our sexual orientation so therefore it's a natural thing. And let's assume we can convince social conservatives that being gay isn't a choice. I'm going to say that from where I sit, I don't see that actually helping with stopping the discrimination. First off, social conservatives will argue (and I've actually seen some arguments like this) that just because something is natural and something one is born with does not make it good. Examples I've seen used for this argument: Autism, HIV/AIDS, other genetic defects. Additionally, the arguments focused on queerness not being a choice tend to sound a lot like this: "Do you think I chose this?" That's not a helpful argument and frames being queer as something negative or unwanted. And it's true, being queer is ridiculous complicated in today's society because of all the homophobia and heterosexism, but to be honest, I'm happy being queer. Let's not frame the argument for gay rights around the idea that it sucks to be queer because it does not. Society's prejudices suck, being gay does not. Have I said that enough?
As a small note to the above, one should also note that people of color certainly do not choose to be people of color and yet that has not stopped discrimination towards them.
But what if being gay is a choice? Obviously the conservative crowd already mostly thinks this is the case, so using this as a convincing chip does nothing. But I'm not interested in that. If being queer is a choice.... then so what? It's a perfectly valid choice, so what's wrong with choosing it? If being queer is a choice, it's as much a valid choice as a choice in religion, number of romantic partners, hair color, clothing, anything else. If being queer is fine when it is not a choice, why would it be any less alright as a choice? Ponder all of this, reply in comments and let me know your conclusions.
After all, if someone chooses to be gay, how would that lessen the deep love they have with a partner (if they have a partner)? How would that invalidate the idea that queer folk - those who have chosen and those who have not - deserve absolute and total equality with the heterosexual community? Seriously, I'm curious, so let me know if you've got explaining for this.
A note: My personal feelings on this is that it's probably not a choice but honestly, I couldn't care less if it is or is not. It's just not important to our fight.
3 people have thoughts on this topic:
The question of homosexuality as a choice is not meant to explain or otherwise answer for discrimination. As far as its similarity to the color of a person's skin and similar traits, your arguments otherwise are basically on point.
The reason people (and by people, I mean conservatives) talk so much about choice is because, considering the 'negative connotation' some link to homosexuality, it changes how they interpret choice versus biology. If it was biological, I have no doubt there'd be talk talk talk about 'curing the disease,' and if it was a choice, 'oh, no, maybe there's a parenting style causing this choice' etc. etc.
The queer community knows the question of choice is irrelevant, but the homophobic people in society want it to be the main point of debate. Call it what you will, but I see it as a generational gap in the country. By the time the baby boomer generation phases out of the controlling generation in the world, the gay rights movement will easily sweep in and take back what they've been waiting for.
Agreed with first Anonymous. Unfortunately, there is no way to phrase the biological-or-choice argument correctly to social conservatives and have it sound like something good. I think the ultimate solution of understanding lies in distancing sexual orientation from other aspects of human nature/genetics. Like race, it's just the way that people ARE. Of course there are ways of justifying race through genetics, but there are no ways of 'curing' race (nor is there any reason to). I think, as the younger generation, all we can do is know that our [sexualities] are normal and wait.
Also, who said genetic abnormalities were bad? They're just differences, god-damn-it.
I think this question of choice/genetics is actually a bigger issues than both of you are saying. Listen to a lot of arguments for LGBTQ rights and such. Things get phrased around the idea that it's not a choice.
And I do hear it getting discussed more often that others it seems. Perhaps it's just the circles I travel in? Really, I don't know.
And while not all genetic abnormalities are bad, I'm gonna say the ones that kill you, they perhaps suck. The abnormalities mind you, not the folk with them, of course.
Post a Comment