A funny little story came across one of my urban legends mailings today: When the Gods Go in DragAlso, this British Op-Ed was posted to one of my bi mailing lists, although it didn't include a URL or source. I liked it a great deal, although I personally would also have added that the obsession with the "we can't help it" defense doesn't actually help our cause, and creates a lot of pitfalls that "we don't have to agree with you" doesn't. I've long argued that a "Freedom of Religion" style of argument is much more beneficial to us than the "we can't help it" argument. Plenty of things that are "natural" are also negative (aggression is a natural animal reaction -- we still expect people to control it, and punish them when they don't), and it leaves open the implication that if we
could help it, we should be under some moral obligation to do so. This is particularly problematic for bi people -- how many of us haven't heard the argument that since we're capable of mixed-gender relationships, we should only pursue those? The "freedom of religion" style of argument is much more along the lines of "you don't have to agree with me, and you're free to believe I'm going to hell, but you can't legally discriminate against me". Isn't that the basis of what we're going for?
Activist criticises gay gene obsession
29-June-2006
Comment
Gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell hits out at the obsession with finding a gay gene and suggests sexual orientation is deemed by a variety of factors
( Read more... )