On Sexuality, Gender, and Culture Wars

Hello, Internet!

I’ve decided that I’m going to try to write at least once a week from now on, which should fit in quite well with my hectic school and extracurricular activities schedule.

So, today, I’m going to talk about controversial things. Very, very controversial things.

Let’s start off with a ridiculously and unnecessarily heated word called “sexuality.”  Or, perhaps the term that will give us the definition that we’re looking for is “sexual orientation.”

Google defines ‘sexual orientation’ as:

“A person’s sexual identity in relation to the gender to which they are attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual.”

I don’t like this definition. I don’t like it at all. It’s ostensibly standardized, rather misleading, and enforces a stereotype within itself. When I say that it’s standardized, I mean that this particular Google definition seems like one that you’d find just about anywhere, and that’s a problem. It’s a problem because it’s so rigid and accepted, almost in a derogatory way. It seems to depict that there are only three sexual orientations: heterosexual, homosexual, and/or bisexual. That is incredibly untrue. There is no such thing as a set number of ways that one person can be attracted to another person. There is no such thing as saying, “gender is the body you were born with and that’s that. The kind that you’re attracted to determines what your sexual orientation is.” I’m not saying that there are one hundred different sexual orientations or only one. I am saying that it’s up to you to see as many sexual orientations as you’d like or none at all if you want that. You are given a right to love whomever you want, and this right should never be limited to a farcical and ridiculously standardized list of three defined options. That’s just silly. You are a human being, and you should never be subject to that kind of delusive stereotyping. You love who you love and that’s that.

And just to prove my point about the definition of ‘sexual orientation’ being so standardized, here’s Wikipedia’s definition:

“Sexual orientation describes an enduring pattern of attraction—emotional, romantic, sexual, or some combination of these—to the opposite sex, the same sex, or both sexes, and the genders that accompany them. These attractions are generally subsumed under heterosexuality, homosexuality, and bisexuality.”

Again with the three categories.

And here’s how The Free Dictionary defines it:

“The direction of one’s sexual interest toward members of the same, opposite, or both sexes.”

Again, again, again. I could go on forever and ever but I think this particular point is clear– people are extremely uninformed when it comes to the basic definition of sexuality/sexual orientation and that isn’t okay. It just isn’t.

And here’s exactly why it’s so incredibly unacceptable for this rigid list of three particular sexual orientations to exist: it creates ignorance. Ignorance is very, very bad. You’ll see those bigots who argue for the sake of love to be between a man and a woman only– anything besides that is ungodly or a terrible sin or an abomination of mankind or will catch your hair on fire. It just doesn’t make sense. In case you haven’t deduced it already, those people who believe that are ignorant. And their beliefs have created a scarily immense stereotype that defines same-sex/pansexual attraction. On the other hand, people have created another stereotype that heterosexual attraction is normal and godly and wonderful and everything else that’s acceptable. But that just isn’t true. Being attracted to the opposite sex is fantastic, but anything other than that is not disgusting or repulsive in any way. Anything other than a heterosexual orientation is beautiful and should be embraced, just like heterosexuality itself. There is no borderline between good and bad when it comes to who you love and who you are.

The topic of gender and the topic of sexuality go hand in hand, so I’ll say this now. There are more than two genders, just as there are more than three defined sexual orientations. There is static gender, and there is dynamic gender, and there are more than two genders, and guess what? If you want, you can argue that there is no such thing as gender. Who’s going to stop you? Gender is not defined by the clothing you wear or the way you style your hair or the way you behave which has to adhere to the labels of either ‘feminine’ or ‘masculine.’ In fact, it isn’t even defined by what kind of reproductive organs you have. There is nothing wrong with a boy who likes wearing dresses or playing with dolls, just as there is nothing wrong with a girl who hates dressing up and enjoys playing with action figures. These characteristics don’t define an individual as being male or female or both or masculine or feminine. There is nothing that should strictly define how people must identify themselves as, and that’s that. Gender is whatever you want it to be, and however many you want there to be, and so on and so forth.

Another thing that bothers me lies along the same lines as my earlier argument about sexuality. I think that it’s absolutely absurd when people act like a sexual orientation other than what is defined as ‘straight’ is bizarre and should be acted upon like it’s so much more different than being straight itself. There are usually two categories of reactions when people find out that someone is not, in fact, straight: they either condemn this person, or they treat the person like they are special and different, thus making that person seem inferior. Let me explain. I’ll address the first type of reaction first, and that is the ‘condemning the person’ type of reaction. I think this one is self-explanatory– the non-straight person is thought of by others as weird and different and unacceptable. They are excluded from social activities and thought of as a separate type of human being. The other kind of reaction is equally deplorable, although it may not seem like it from the surface. Say, for example, that there is a gay boy who has recently come out. Everybody around him is supposedly/ostensibly accepting and supportive, and they decide to show this by being more kind and attentive to this particular boy than to other people. However, with that always comes the realization that this ‘kindness’ is as fake and ludicrous as the people’s supposed ‘acceptance’ and ‘support’ of the boy. These people feel like in order to come off as accepting, they have to treat this kid like he’s special and different and everything in between. They think that they’re doing a good thing, but is it really that if you wouldn’t treat this boy so kindly if he were straight? It’s really just absurd. I’m not saying that this is the case in all situations, but it’s definitely a very prominent scenario and depicts the non-straight person as lesser than others. I’m also not implying that these are the only two kinds of reactions, because there are indeed others, but I’m trying to say that these are the two that I (and likely many others) encounter most often.

Here’s another point that I would like to make: there is nothing that should be scary or wrong about changing ideas about who you do or do not love. There really isn’t. If you consider yourself heterosexual, you might call that safe, because no one will make fun of you or treat you differently or categorize you. But what if, for example, you woke up one morning and decided that you not only liked males, but also females? What if you realized that you only liked females? What if you deduced that you didn’t like any, or that you liked all sexes (regardless of how many there are to you)?

What if, what if?

But here’s the thing:

It.

Doesn’t.

Matter. 

There is nothing that should be frightening or unacceptable about questioning who you’re attracted to, because there really isn’t anything wrong with it. If you considered yourself bi-curious for a day, that doesn’t categorize you as bisexual or gay or just plain different. You could decide that you are, in fact, open to all genders, and then realize a week later that you’re actually only attracted to someone of the opposite sex. I might be pansexual today but realize that I’m purely straight a few months later. Likewise, I could be only attracted to guys at this particular moment but realize that I’m attracted to both guys and girls in the near future. In all honesty, those particular feelings are not less valid or less existent because I may have identified differently on various occasions. It really just doesn’t matter– the only thing that does matter is that you can be attracted to whomever the hell you want at any time you want, and that will always be okay. Always.

And it’s so wonderful when I see non-straight persons defending themselves when questioned by those who have a problem with it. However, common arguments made by those particular non-straight persons are:

“Nobody chooses to be gay,” or “I was born this way,” or “I can’t help it– it’s not my fault.”

And these very common arguments always imply: “If I could choose my orientation, I’d choose to be straight because that’s acceptable.” And that, in turn, implies that there is something inherently inferior about being non-straight.

But guess what? There isn’t.

I’m proud of who I do and do not love, and there is nothing inferior or lesser or just plain bad about that. There never has been and there never will be.

And I won’t delve too deep into this, but that’s why the idea of marriage equality is so significant: it’s legal recognition that all couples, not just heterosexual ones, are intrinsically equal and acceptable.

But it’s not so easy to just look past this and assume that everybody knows that all love is equal. Many, in fact, do not realize this. An example would be the passage of the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996 under Clinton’s administration. This law defines marriage as a contract between a man and a woman and allowed states not to recognize marriages performed in other states where different marriage laws applied. An improvement has taken place under the Obama administration, where they determined that section 3 was unconstitutional and, though it would continue to enforce the law, it would no longer defend it in court. Although they didn’t repeal it, it was a small step towards equality. Unfortunately, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives fought back by having the House General Counsel to defend the law in place of the Department of Justice. I mentioned this example just to show the progress (and, of course, regression by the GOP) of marriage equality in today’s government, and its hope for an equal future.

And, really, what’s so different about the issue of marriage equality today and the issue of interracial marriage fifty years ago? Not much, really, when you don’t look into religion as being the primary factor of the former. Oh, and I just have to mention this:

Remember Republican senator Rick Santorum freaking out over an Associated Press reporter asking about same-sex marriage? Santorum responds to the reporter by discussing ‘man on dog sex,’ effectively bringing bestiality into the conversation. So Santorum probably thought that once the line between heterosexual and same-sex marriage is erased, so will the line for bestiality. But you know, I think the difference is pretty clear when talking about two people, regardless of their sexual orientations, getting married, and a man and an animal eloping.

And that’s just a small window into the role of the same-sex marriage controversy in today’s politics.

And to wrap up my post today, I just want to say this:

Don’t ever let someone tell you who you are or who you can and cannot love. Don’t you ever. Never let someone tell you that if you’re not straight or gay, you must be bisexual, or something along those lines. Never let someone tell you that you can’t do this or that because it’s not particularly masculine or feminine. Don’t use ‘gay’ or ‘homo’ or any of those terms as derogatory, because those words don’t deserve to be used like that and that just makes you look ridiculously stupid. Never be afraid to fight for what you believe in just because people will judge you and you’re afraid of people and their ignorant opinions. But you have to stand up because of how unjust our world is– that’s life.

You are you and don’t you let anybody tell you otherwise.