Skip to main content

Homosexuality is not a choice for Mineart

My homosexuality on the other hand, is NOT A CHOICE. I didn't pick it. I wouldn't change it if I could, any more than any black person would deliberately go out and change the color of their skin. It's a part of me. But I certainly didn't choose it, any more than the color of my hair, my height, or any other part of me.

I've written this a billion times, and I'm writing it again. What makes me gay isn't my behavior, it's my feelings. Homosexuality isn't about behavior, it's about who you fall in love with and are attracted to. Choice has nothing to do with it.

Of course I could choose to marry a man and have a monogamous relationship with him for the rest of my life. But that wouldn't make me heterosexual. That would make me a gay woman in a relationship with a man. A miserable relationship that I hated, he hated, and any children we had hated. It would be a destructive mess to everyone concerned. Want proof of that? If you're heterosexual, picture yourself in a relationship with someone of your own sex. Think you could make it work? Think you would be happy? I thought not. Thousands of gay people have entered into relationships with someone of the opposite sex and can attest to the destruction and misery it causes.


Source: Steph Mineart
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

On 'natural'

I don't think 'natural' is good. There are many things that we apply (some almost arbitrary) (some ignorant and backward ideas of natural and not-natural agenda-propagating) rules of morality. I think 'natural' is a political rhetoric, profoundly abused.  'Diversity' is the only defensible rhetoric for 'thinking' beings. We are not, of course, the only creatures that do thinking, but we are the only creatures with the power to oppress others and other creatures whose languages we don't understand.  Us (badly) thinking creatures, slowly, ponderously gathering the evidence of our badness (I see no reason for your (god's) patience with us), have the ability to decide to be better than (the fashionable) 'natural' of the day.  It is our responsibility to transcend our vileness. Just that. That one task. Our thinkingness I believe is for that. A world (constructed by god) to demonstrate this point. And we will find every rhetor...
Post a Comment
Read more

Grrl counter-power, I love Doris Day

Flashback Friday, a column on feminist notions ... To be fair - it's difficult to think of a non-self-defining feminist woman as anything but a tool of the patriarchy. I have to concentrate on the fact that even though a woman would not call herself a feminist, she would never endorse footbinding (to name a radical example) and it doesn't necessarily mean she is a doormat either. In fact, some of my favorite women scorn my feminism and hate it when they are judged solely on their marital status or gender. Ironically if you look at films made during the so-called liberal 60s and 70s you will see that movies align the woman's role less to what is happening politically in the big wide world and more to what is happening in pornography. The rise of the snuff movie mirrored the rise of violence towards women in the movies, serial killer paradise. Pornography always centers on the woman - probably in an attempt to hide the size of the penis. From my perspective, I am less un...
8 comments
Read more

Mary Daly explains the pejoration (of one) of the words related to women

Of Death and Conscience: Brief thoughts on gender role and the values of the dominant culture in medicine : "“Under the influence of the Church and the newly formed male-dominated medical establishment, the word “witch,” which originally meant “wise one,” became a term of scorn. It took a reign of terror lasting several hundred years to radically alter a way of life thousands of years old. Millions of women who carried the healing lineage were systematically killed (see The Church and the Second Sex by Mary Daly).”"
4 comments
Read more