You've demonstrated a point I just made in another post. I notice that you said "openly homosexual". That's a whole different ballgame that merely being homosexual. I fully concur that choosing to live openly as a homosexual may well be viewed as some sort of political statement, just as choosing to live in the closet may be viewed as a statement of its own. But it is the CHOICE that is political, not the homosexuality itself.
I question the assumption that sexual orientation is an accurate predictor of subsequent choices which may or may not be related to sexuality.
Yes, odds are a homosexual will ultimately decide to start having sex with members of his own gender. But it's not an absolute given, just as it's not a given that a homosexual will vote Democratic or start buying a specific brand of vodka based merely on his sexual orientation.
--Previous Message--
: Well, I guess I admit to falling in
: camp #2. In this culture, there's
: just no way one can be openly
: homosexual without there being
: political implications. It may not
: be right, it may not seem fair,
: but that's just the way it is. As
: with sex/gender, race, religion,
: economics, etc., politicization
: starts with something that on its
: face shouldn't be used as an
: excuse to oppress, but which does,
: and from then on, it's political,
: like it or not. And it requires a
: response.
:
: --Previous Message--
: Nope. Not at all.
:
: I'll admit to recognizing two
: camps, but they are defined as (1)
: those who believe that sexual
: orientation is about sex, and (2)
: those who believe it is about
: something more than sex.
:
: I think that "gay" is a
: loaded term which invokes the
: philosophy of camp number 2. It
: comes with an agenda, just like
: "queer", even though
: most people who use it casually
: probably don't have this intent.
:
: --Previous Message--
: I agree with much of what David
: writes, actually, especially his
: conclusions. Surprise!
:
: My general objection is that he
: seems to put all us homos into one
: of two boxes: those who ape
: slavishly every aspect of gay
: culture (whom he dubs
: "gay"), and those who
: are totally divorced from any hint
: of it ("homosexual"). I
: think that's way too simple; I
: certainly don't fit into either
: category, and I'm not familiar
: with anyone who does.
:
: --Previous Message--
: I noticed that, too. However I so
: strongly agree with the main
: premise of the essay that sexual
: orientation is but one aspect of a
: person's personality, that even
: considering the parts I take issue
: with, my overall impression is one
: of agreement.
:
: The analogy I've used with myself
: is that personality has many
: hundreds of different dimensions,
: and the gay/straight axis is but
: one of them. I find our society's
: obsession with classifying people
: along it oppressive.
:
: --Previous Message--
: I had lots of reactions to your
: essay, most of which I think I'd
: better address at my own site
: someday. One question for now,
: though: how can sexual orientation
: be politically neutral when
: discrimination based on that
: factor is alive and well? Doesn't
: the fact of that discrimination,
: and that "enemies of sexual
: freedom must be fought off,"
: make sexuality political?
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
