Lesbians marrying boys who are politically active. Lesbians insist that they continue to define themselves as lesbians although they are married to males. They get offended if you ask them. You’re as confused as I am?
I watched Joann Loulan’s news / entertainment show 20/20 one night. Ms. Loulan is a female— self-identified as a lesbian— who for some 15 years has been very active in politics. She has recognized herself as a lesbian over the past 20 years, according to statements by Ms. Loulan. She began dating a male friend, however, becoming bored and lonely between friendships. The connection advanced to sexual intercourse, and then to live together. She confessed to being in love with him when questioned about her emotions for this person.
As a female who came out at a late era— 33— I can identify with confronting changes in one’s sexual identity— even re-evaluating a contradictory history. There are many memories that reconcile what one feels correct and true in the present with what was correct and true in the past. However, after becoming romantically involved with a female, I didn’t continue to define myself as a heterosexual woman. It may be stupid, but I thought that I would have seemed stupid to try to identify with a female as a heterosexual while walking arm-in-arm. Call me a cleanser.
I confess I’m the first to say a hand is a hand and a mouth is a mouth, and if you let go of all your private inhibitions, you could enjoy sex with either sex. I don’t think sex has anything to do with the sexual orientation of a person either. After all, gays and lesbians have a lengthy history of closing people who have married, bore kids, and died without anyone close to them getting any concept on their side of their relationships. And in reality, when pushed by the interviewer, Ms. Loulan clarified that she thought that sexual orientation was based on a spirituality, soul, and some emotional bond— not sex.
However, Ms. Loulan did not say that her connection with her masculine friend was just sex. Ms. Loulan actually said she was in love with her male buddy. Maybe I miss something, but I thought in love was a spirituality, a heart, and some bonding. So, with the words of Ms. Loulan, didn’t she say she was at least bisexual— a label she claims to find offensive? Emphatically, she says, no, she’s not bisexual. She argues that if the connection with the masculine buddy ended, she’d expect her next relationship to be with a female, and she’s still a lesbian because of that.
I don’t want to seem to pick up on the words of Ms. Loulan— And I don’t intend to condemn her— but she’s a good illustration of what I’ve been watching in LGBT politics recently. These females should, in my private view, get out of their self-enforced attitudes and recognize their orientation for what they are— bisexual.
Bisexual. I said it again there. I suspect that you have also survived reading it. I’m very curious why it’s so despised this sexual orientation. Or prevented at least. Or is this more than a phrase or label? The story of 20/20 stated that gay or lesbian identification is politically more strong, merely because homosexual lobbies have been around longer and have more influence. That’s it? Lesbians who marry males; gays who marry females, and everyone who wears the incorrect label for politics, authority, and cash?
I believed we were struggling to get straight people over the labels— but maybe we need to begin with our own first. My vote is welcome— anyone who wishes to assist everyone achieve the same rights and privileges as heterosexuals— whether they are homosexual, lesbian, bisexual, heterosexual, transgendered. But kindly— if we wear labels, wear the correct ones.
Until next time…