So how does everyone here feel about "political" queerness?

From what I understand, gender identity is formed in childhood and becomes expressed in adolescence. The jury is out on how much of that is nature and how much is nurture, but most research indicates they both play a role.

When someone has a gender identity that is different from the heavily binary society we have tolerated for eons, they are left with a complicated dichotomy reconciling their sense of self and their social-sexual role. This may present as a "choice" to be a lesbian, but it is probably far more complicated when you strip away the layers. Attraction comes in many forms. Romantic attraction, sexual attraction and camaraderie are all very powerful influences in intimate relationships through life. Finding a perfect match is frankly, unlikely. Many people are fluid in what they prioritize with a partner, often with overlap amongst these traits, rather than fluid strictly in a manifestation of sexuality.

As a minority community, we should have increased empathy and absolutely accept and support each other as we make sense of who we are. Discrimination of queer identification in that it is less pure than binary identification homosexuality is inaccurate and bigoted. It diminishes someone that already feels a split or undefined identity.

 

I don't personally think someone can genuinely "pick" to be on either of the extremes of the spectrum (be it straight or gay/lesbian) as I don't believe you can decide who you are attracted to, BUT I do believe you can decide who you date.

Someone could be gay and chose to date the opposite sex (we see it a lot on here), and obviously the other way around, a woman could be straight and yet decide to date exclusively women due to bad experiences with men or because she is sick of men or whatever other motive... Do I believe people who are straight and/or gay and date the opposite of what they naturally are attracted to by choice are fully fulfilled and happy? No. Do I think they deserve respect? Yes, but I also think it's important they acknowledge the fact that they are chosing who they are DATING not what their sexuality is. Because implying that sexuality is a natural choice can really damage the LGBTQ+ community as it implies that there is a "cure" or that gay people are just being beligerent by refusing to oblige to the norm even though they could which is obviously very problematic (especially in today's political climate!).

Personally I think the only people who can potentially be fully fulfilled "picking" a side are bisexuals people, but even then, I don't think bi people who exclusively date the same-sex are gay by choice, I think they are bi and chosing to exclusively date people of the same-sex.

So to answer your question, no I don't think someone can chose to be queer, but they can definitely chose to live a queer "lifestyle".

 

Frankly I don't get it. One doesn't have to become an animal to promote animal rights. (Nevermind the fact that humans are animals too. Animals that are not humans is what I mean.)

If someone feels a genuine attraction towards same sex, they can call themselves whatever it feels relevant to them. But if a cisgendered person has not felt genuine romantic/sexual attraction towards the same sex at all, yet calls themselves bi/gay/queer/etc....

Then I'd have so many questions to ask. Yes anyone can choose their own label, but it shouldn't be treated as some role-playing game.

 

I think it's something that we need to be careful not to generalize about or make too many assumptions about, because we cannot feel what someone feels or what exactly someone means when they say they're a political gay/lesbian / gay by choice. I think the reason you find this more within lesbian circles is because the union of women has always been considered a threat to the patriarchy and also been used as such: nothing pisses a heteronormative, patriarchal society off more than women refusing to be with men.

Broadly speaking, I'd say there are three categories:
1. people who are actually straight and pretend to be gay
2. people who are bisexual but choose to be with only one gender and feel like gay/lesbian better describes their situation (as i've discussed in another topic)
3. people who are gay and use the words 'political' and 'choice' in a different way than it may seem on the surface.

The first category is actually the one I think is least common, especially as a lifelong thing, because like @Linning says, living a life pretending like that is likely to be unfulfilling and incredibly difficult to actually keep up. As for the political lesbianism movement, I have to wonder how many of these women weren't lesbians to begin with - and that's something that we'll never know, because we cannot actually feel what they felt and determine if their attraction was real or not. I'm a bit conflicted about whether really calling sexuality a choice is beneficial, because on the one hand it does make it seem as though it's something that can be changed and therefore helps homophobes argue against it... but on the other hand, i would want people's sexualities to be supported EVEN IF it was a choice and not something inherent to us. To me the origin of sexuality shouldn't have to matter in whether or not we consider a person worthy of being respected.

The second category I've discussed before so I don't want to repeat too much, but one could argue that these people are the ones who really make a choice - whether they want to acknowledge their full range of attractions or just a part of it. In my opinion, if you're attracted to multiple genders but actively chose to only be with one gender, it's perfectly okay to call yourself gay. We don't get to police the way other people feel, and as long as a label communicates clearly to the outside where someone stands (ie 'i am a woman who only dates women'), it should be fine.

The last is one that is dear to me because I would say I chose to be gay. Not because I would otherwise have been straight, but because I felt like there was a choice: a choice between living a lie and pretending to be straight, and being true to myself and identifying as gay. I chose to be gay because the alternative would've killed me. There's a lot of power in posing it as a choice rather as something inevitable: it gives you full authority over something, it removes you from the victim position and puts you in charge. You're not a victim of your sexuality but you're in control of it - that's what that word means for me.
As for the word political - in my opinion, sexualities are always politicalised, even if we don't want to, because it defies the norms our current society has build. The personal is political, not just in terms of womanhood but also in terms of sexuality. To accept yourself when the world tells you you're abnormal is political. To come out is political. To live your truth in a world not designed for you is political. That is not to say I expect anyone who is LGBT to be a loud advocate or anything - just that every time someone comes out and lives their truth, they make the world a tiny bit more accepting, and that is political in itself.
My queerness is political, it is radical, and to live my truth was a choice. Those are ways to use those words as well without ever meaning you're actually straight but just pretending to be gay.

I suppose I don't have an issue with 'political queerness' so much because I doubt there are actually that many people pretending to be gay for political reasons, but all the more queer people who find comfort in calling their sexuality (or gender, for that matter) political rather than something natural they have no control over. And I don't doubt the fact that there are way more people who are, indeed, sexually attracted to the same gender calling themselves 'political lesbians' or whatever than is sometimes suggested by it merely being a political choice, especially those who make a lifelong commitment to it! I do think pretending you're gay when you're not is not a great thing - but policing it too strictly would just exclude many people who are LGBT but have a hard time coming to terms with it or whatever.

 

SO TRUE. If you're happy and you know it, clap those hands. La dee da. Approval and understanding for lesbians is rare.

 

I wouldn't date a "political lesbian" or a full on gay man who wants a wife as a cover. I want to feel loved. I used to date someone who wasn't into me. It was awful.

Of course, everyone should decide for themselves what to do with their life, to be unhappy too. But I don't want to take part in it, because I want to be happy and I don't think it matters in the grand scheme of things if I end up with a man or a woman. Or if anyone else does, really.

As for if I think one can choose who tbey love, no, I don't think they can. But they can decide whether to act on it and how.

 

In which way do you mean accepting or rejecting such people? Attending LGB events? Being friends with them? Dating them? Or do you mean why people are so hateful about this sometimes?

 

Unless it comes to dating in which area I have some experiences, whatever floats your boat, really. But hey, it's me and my needs, sex matters to me a lot, but for someone else it might work out better.

I think the offense stems from it being hard to find other gay folks. When you finally reach that gay space, you don't want heteros to get in your way any more. It stems from frustration trying to flirt with the heteros. And being hit on by them. You want to finally meet people with whom the feeling is mutual. It's a hard and frustrating search.

Additionally, heteros have strange ideas about being gay sometimes. Those preconceptions don't gain you popularity. Being political might come across as one of those silly unrealistic ideas.

You would be surprised at the number of straight gals who go to gay clubs... don't get me wrong... but I was looking for a gay/bi gf. Not for another girl who freaks out and is turned off when I ask her out.

So that might be why.

 

I do believe a lot of the offense comes from the fact that many gay people actually don't want to be gay so when someone who isn't gay comes in their space and say " Well look at me I am not gay but I chose to be" implying they could do the same (or that it's easy aka slightly undermining their struggle), it can be frustrating, also I don't think being gay and chosing to be gay is the same thing. People who chose to be gay can decide to step away from the "lifestyle" and everything that implies, leaving all the hardship behind, queer people don't get to do that. Someone who is gay might decide to go back to the opposite sex but they will still be denying their true identity, it's not the same.

It bothers me when female friends who aren't queer at all joke about going to women instead because men are terrible for example. And while I can fully comiserate with their struggles with men I don't like people implying that being queer is easier or that queer women are with women because men aren't good enough. My sexuality with women has nothing to do with men, what I feel towards men is totally separated to what I feel towards women so jokes like that make my life as a queer woman more difficult. So when straight people decide to live the queer life and feel like they represent actual queer people. I believe it can be problematic.

Most people on this forum come from developed countries with mostly protective laws for queer people and for the most part we don't have to fear for our life on a daily basis, but in countries where there are very few rights available for LGBTQ+ people and the government is waiting on any kind of excuses to beat up on queer people. Implying that sexuality is a choice (and therefore that gay people are willingly chosing to make the wrong choice) can genuinely be desastrous.


That being said, I do think they should be welcome to LGBTQ+ events as allies are (and especially as they are impacted as much as us by LGBTQ+ rights) and I personally can't see why people would refuse to befriend them but I personally wouldn't date them no. I want someone who dates me because they like me and are genuinely attracted to me, not because they have talked themselves into liking girls. (It's different if it's a bi girl who has decided to exclusively date women as she is naturally attracted to women.)

 

I imagine they were somewhere on the bisexual spectrum to begin with. I don't think it's possible for a 100% straight person to show physical intimacy towards someone of the same sex without a strong repulsive reflex. Unless they trained themselves to not automatically pull away. I don't think anyone is THAT dedicated.

 

I guess they would receive but not give? Though women I know who identify as straight 100% and non-curious are usually very repulsed by the idea of being sexual with another woman, so I agree they most likely would be in the spectrum somewhere.

 

By "pull away" I just meant not want to engage in any physical forms of affection including mouth kissing/holding hands etc.

 

I get what you mean by this, but if that were true and the hatred were because of women refusing to be with men, then gay men would be celebrated and loved by straight men because they're removing themselves as competition. If there are 3 guys and 1 girl, that's a difficult competition to win the girl. If one of the guys is gay, suddenly it's a whole lot easier for both of the remaining two to get what they want. There would be no reason to hate gay guys, they'd be every straight guy's best friend, a dude they can talk to about dude stuff without having to worry about their girl being stolen.

As for the original post - Straight, gay, and lesbian I don't think are ever a choice. Bisexual...kind of might be. While it would be really hard to completely override natural attraction and switch totally to the other gender, it would be substantially easier to mentally convince yourself you like both genders and essentially 'force' yourself to become bisexual for whatever reason, including for political stuff.

Also, thank you for trying to include men in the question, that is appreciated.