Labels for sexuality

[GaryKelly]

My best friend refused to accept a sexuality label whether it was gay, straight or bi. He was sexual, period, and the recipients of his affection and love were those for whom he felt a strong attraction. Simple as that.

 

Human beings are obsessive about labeling everything and compartmentalizing everything. IT'S GOTTA HAVE A LABEL! Well, the only label my friend accepted was sexual, and he had an abundance of friends of both sexes, many of whom were also lovers, including so-called 'straights'.

 

Ya know, join a site like this one and you're asked if you're gay, straight, bi or undecided. So even GA has (perhaps unwittingly) joined the label obsession. I can handle M or F but I'm not sure that anything else is relevant unless your only reason for being here is a sexual encounter. BTW, I wrote a book about my friend...a bio. It's free in PDF format at www.kellytrader.com

 

So, my question is this: how important is sexual orientation in terms of 'the whole person'?

[Camy]

how important is sexual orientation in terms of 'the whole person'?

Not important at all, though it takes time to come to realise this. It also depends on how and where you were brought up, and the parents you have.

 

I'm still questing for who I am, which is why I put down Bisexual when I joined. Truly; love is what it is, and gender race or creed shouldn't come into it ... except they do.

 

Camy

PS I'm much looking forward to reading 'Green Room'. We're all chasing that perfect wave.

[Drewbie]

If everyone was bi then yes it would be easy to ask any guy out on a date, I don't want to go up to a guy and ask him out then punch me, Being gay doesn't run my life, if certain people ask me I will say yes.

 

 

 

 

Attitudes in Prague is different then most places, str8 guys or gay guys, will have have sex with guys or woman, (some str8 guys won't, talked with a friend when discussing this) sex is just different for them.

[Jack Scribe]

So, my question is this: how important is sexual orientation in terms of 'the whole person'?

 

First, welcome to GA!

 

I don't think labels mean much but "being sexual" without boundries seems to be pretty 'bi' to me. Like Drewbie says, I acknowledge being a gay man if I'm asked...end of story. However, I also will admit that my social life is almost exclusively with other gay and lesbian friends. When you live in a community like Palm Springs (40% + of the population is GLBT) that's easy to do. And I believe that "safety in numbers" is a valid philosophy.

 

Camy's reaction is probably the most realistic. The package loves come in is not the same for everyone.

 

Look forward to reading your story. Strongly suggest you make your sig a marketing tool for your story with the link. It takes a lot of whistles, flashing lights and drum-beating to get a reader following.

 

Jack

[Morganx]

I really don

[Drewbie]

ya know if you don't want to label your self then don't put in your sexuality.

[Graeme]

Labels serve a purpose by broadly categorising something. However, they can equally mislead because people then expect that all items with that label will have similar characteristics. People are too complex for that.

 

I'll use myself as an example. I consider myself to be homosexual, even thought I'm in a monogamous (and happy) hetereosexual relationship. I refuse to call myself bisexual because that implies that I am attracted to women -- I'm not. I love my wife, but if I saw good looking strangers, it would be the males that I would be interested in, not the females. I say I'm gay because it give an 80-90% picture of my sexual orientation and is a lot simpler than to try to explain the reality. For those that need to know, I can go into more detail, but for most people giving myself the simple label "gay" suffices.

 

The idea of not accepting a label of straight/bi/gay comes, I think, from a resistance to being put in a box. You love who you love, and you don't want to exclude a possible relationship because you've put a "wall" around yourself by implicitly telling people you are only interested in a subset of people.

 

I have a good friend (the best man at our wedding, actually), who I recently came out to. In the conversation that followed, he said that several people have thought he's gay (he's in his 40s and not in any sort of relationship). He has in the past dated some girls, but he said he won't close the door to the possibility of a relationship with a guy. He doesn't expect it, but he's not going to say no if that turns out to be the person that he falls in love with.

 

Labels are related to stereotypes and have the same danger. People see the label, recall the stereotype that is associated with that label, and think they know everything they need to know. Too many people don't realise that there is a broad range of characteristics within a label -- ANY label applied to humans -- and that they don't fully describe a person.

 

eg. I'm an Australian. Australian's tend to be beer-drinking, sports-loving yobboes. I didn't start drinking beer until well into my 30s. I didn't start drinking alcohol at all until well into my 20s (comes from having a Methodist upbringing). I like sports, but I'm not mad-keen on sport, especially watching it. I'm just as likely to read a book as to watch a football game on TV. I've got a label that I'm proud of (Australian), but I don't fit the stereotype that goes with that label.

 

The Gay/Bi/Straight label has the same problem. It's useful to provide an overall indication of behaviour in one particular area of human life, but it should be treated as just an indication, not a straitjacket.

[JamesSavik]

There was a character in Lil Buddah's Someday Out of the Blue who was a friend of the protagonist.

 

When asked about his orientation:

 

"Are you gay, str8, bi?"

 

"No, I'm Cody."

 

I like his answer a lot because where I came from, your label could really cost you. I think we would all probably be a lot saner if we could blow off the label crap and be comfortable being individuals.

 

Of course, I'm an idealistic pragmatist: I long for the ideal but I don't know the way to Utopia¹.

 

________________________________

 

1- isn't Utopia somewhere in California?

[Drewbie]

Again that would be nice, but don't see that happening everywhere, people I know don't have an issue saying that, really I don't want to end up asking a guy if he would want to dance or date and punch me or yell out that im a fag.

 

Just cause I say im gay, I still individual, To many think of gay and then stupid stereotypes.

Edited May 21, 2007 by Drewbie

[Guest raz]

I, personally, don't have a problem with the "gay" label. I find that it's there to do what it's supposed to. All it does is tell others that I am romantically interested in guys. That has so far been the case--I've just never felt that way towards a woman. Does my sexual orientation define who I am? Not completely, but it is an attribute. Just like I happen to speak English, and I happen to be quite tall.

 

There are a lot of stereotypes that come with the label, but if you don't take the label too seriously, I think you're fine. So many people are afraid to match the stereotypes that they grow to become ashamed of who they are just because every now and then it just happens to match up. Just because it's a stereotype doesn't mean you have to avoid it like the plague; if it's who you are, it's who you are. As long as you're not purposely changing yourself to match up/not match up with it, I don't see a problem.

[MMandM]

The only time I have use for labels is when I

[colinian]

My best friend refused to accept a sexuality label whether it was gay, straight or bi. He was sexual, period, and the recipients of his affection and love were those for whom he felt a strong attraction. Simple as that.

 

Human beings are obsessive about labeling everything and compartmentalizing everything. IT'S GOTTA HAVE A LABEL! Well, the only label my friend accepted was sexual, and he had an abundance of friends of both sexes, many of whom were also lovers, including so-called 'straights'.

 

Ya know, join a site like this one and you're asked if you're gay, straight, bi or undecided. So even GA has (perhaps unwittingly) joined the label obsession. I can handle M or F but I'm not sure that anything else is relevant unless your only reason for being here is a sexual encounter. BTW, I wrote a book about my friend...a bio. It's free in PDF format at www.kellytrader.com

 

So, my question is this: how important is sexual orientation in terms of 'the whole person'?

 

That's right in line with what I think. I'm a normal guy who just happens to be in love with another guy. That's all that needs to be said, IMO.

 

Colin

[rknapp]

There are a lot of stereotypes that come with the label, but if you don't take the label too seriously, I think you're fine.

 

The trouble with that is most people cannot go on without a label of some sort. It goes back to the old saying, "If you're not somebody then you're nobody." Labels also have a strong backing in pride. Graeme mentioned that he's proud to be Australian even though he doesn't really fit the stereotype. I'm proud to be 25% German, even though I've never left North America. I'm also proud to be a Florida cracker, even though I moved to NJ in 1996. If you don't have a label, then chances are that most anyone who crosses your path will be confused as to who you really are. I could say to someone, "I'm me!" and they would most likely try to give me a label according to my appearance... be it "blonde", "lurch" (don't ask), "maniac" (driving), or some other label.

 

IMHO, labels are a good thing such that they give many people a sense of belonging. After all, if you are you, then where does you belong? Yes, labels can be a bad thing, but only when they are used by single-minded people whose only intent is to hurt another person by calling them "fag", "nigger", "chink", "ginny", "Paris Hilton", etc.

[GaryKelly]

All very interesting and intelligent comments...thank you very much. But I think my fav is this one: It's useful to provide an overall indication of behaviour in one particular area of human life, but it should be treated as just an indication, not a straitjacket. Or a gayjacket?

[Graeme]

All very interesting and intelligent comments...thank you very much. But I think my fav is this one: It's useful to provide an overall indication of behaviour in one particular area of human life, but it should be treated as just an indication, not a straitjacket. Or a gayjacket?

Trust another Australian to pick up on that. Yes, I thought it at the time I wrote it....

[Menzoberranzen]

I agree with the people who said labels are useful. Also, in response to to the initial question, I do think sexual orientation (labeled or otherwise) is a small, but integral part of who we are. I do not define myself by my sexuality, but I believe that it is more important to a GLBT person than to a straight person. Like it or not, being gay (or anything other than straight) sets us apart from the 'norm' and therefore it becomes a more distinguishing characteristic.

 

I also find that by embracing the negative terms, you rob people of their only real means of degrading you. Just as black people (notably rappers) fought racism by using 'nigger' amongst themselves, I think that 'fag' and 'faggot' can be useful to diffuse the negatives that go along with the label (although I know a lot of people will disagree with me on this one).

 

It's late, so I'll quit before I start rambling....

 

Menzo

[colinian]

A lot of people don't want to label themselves. This is a valid point of view that need to be respected. A lot of people like to label themselves. That's fine, too. The problem is when people insist on labeling others.

 

Drewbie says that just because he's gay he's still an individual, and too many think "gay" and apply stupid stereotypes. That's the problem. LGBT people are stereotyped, labeled by others. And usually that labeling denigrates and minimizes those to whom it's applied.

 

That's why I don't apply labels to myself, and I don't want others to apply them to me. So what if I'm a guy and I'm in love with another guy? That's our business.

 

What about web sites that ask us to label ourselves like GA? My profile says I'm "Gay". So, if I don't want to be labeled, why the heck did I do that? That best describes my "Sexuality". I could have put something else. Maybe one of the Bi categories, or "Still figuring it out", or "Ask me", or even "Not telling". I used it because "Gay" is what others on GA will understand. They are the ones asking me to label myself.

 

I'm out to my folks. As of our Senior Ball on Saturday I'm out at school. I define "out" as having a boyfriend. Others may apply the "gay" label to me. Such is life.

 

Colin

[Adrian Michaels]

Oooh... I totally had this discussion in one of my SafeZone meetings at college.

 

We were discussing the whole "Labeling" system, and how its applied to the community.

 

The way I see it, no one can label anyone except the person in question. In my case, its quite simple... I'm gay. Gay. Gay. Gay. I have no sexual desires or attractions to females at all, and if you were to put me on a scale of 1-10, 10 being totally and utterly homosexual, I'd probably be anywhere from a 9.9 to 11....Perhaps I'm one of the lucky ones that has an easy time with this.

 

That being said, I feel that being gay is one of the most insignificant aspects of my life. I refuse to let it define who am, nor do I allow it to shape my social circles. I have straight friends, and gay friends, and honestly, I find sexual orientation about as interesting as eye color when it comes to my friends. It may be a noticable and beautiful characteristic about them, but it has no effect on how I regard them.

 

Of course, society would not have it this way. They NEED to label. That's why I'm seen as *ahem* Middle-Class, White, Male, Gay, Protestant, Midwesteran, and Liberal. *whew*

 

I've always views this as an extension of middle school. Everyone fits into their own little groups. Preppie, Indie, Emo, Straightedge, Skater, Jock, Nerd, Cheerleader. Its all the same, but in the big kid, grown up, adult world (look! More labeling!) People can do some SERIOUS judging... and its not always pretty.

 

Bottom line, you are who YOU say you are. I'm gay, and that's all there is to it. You could be bisexual-leaning-towards-males-except-I-like-women-who-are-half-English-half-French. And you know what, that's totally cool with me. You probably have a very interesting love life.

 

I have friend who don't like to label themselves, and won't put a name to what they are. (Which, ironically, puts them into the group of "non-labels" essentially labeling them when they didn't wish to be labeled. Yeah, wrap your head around that...)

 

What right do I have to say that they have to conform to my view of society. None. And that's the point, isn't it??

[GaryKelly]

Weeeeeeeell! What a change from IRC and all the dumb comments there. It's so refreshing to see that there are young peeps who are thoughtful and analytical, and who express themselves so well. I particularly congratulate Colinian and Adrian Michaels for their intelligent views, and I'm sure those young blokes will lead very fulfilling and productive lives. WHERE WERE YOU GUYS WHEN I WAS A KID?

[Adrian Michaels]

Well, I guess that's why I'm going Pre-Law... Political Activist in training right here...

[AFriendlyFace]

Thank you for raising this discussion, Gary. It's a subject I have many thoughts on and one with which I never seem to grow weary.

 

My best friend refused to accept a sexuality label whether it was gay, straight or bi. He was sexual, period, and the recipients of his affection and love were those for whom he felt a strong attraction. Simple as that.

 

Human beings are obsessive about labeling everything and compartmentalizing everything. IT'S GOTTA HAVE A LABEL! Well, the only label my friend accepted was sexual, and he had an abundance of friends of both sexes, many of whom were also lovers, including so-called 'straights'.

Your friend sounds like a very admirable, open-minded person, and I strongly embrace his philosophy. I wouldn't exactly use the label of "sexual", but I suspect the meaning of the label he created would readily apply to myself.

 

I view myself as "gay", but the quotation marks aren't simply for the purpose of this discussion. I'm not gay. I'm "gay". In other words you can go ahead and use the simple straightforward definition of it if you like, but I put the quotation marks/air quotes/tone of voice there to indicate that "hang on there's a footnote". I'm "gay", but I'm absolutely, completely unattracted in quite a few large classes of guys. Similarly there are a few classes of girls that I am attracted to. Sexually I'm overwhelming attracted more to guys than to girls both in terms of the duration of the attraction and in terms of intensity; however, I often do have sexual feelings for girls. In terms of "romantic/relationship" feelings I'm almost exclusively attracted to guys (thus as dreadful as it sounds to say I could see myself "hooking-up" with a girl, but would be much less likely to "date" her). In terms of friendship I thoroughly enjoy the company of both genders, but overwhelming seem to prefer the company of gay males, or females of either orientation (and actually I'm probably most comfortable of all in friendships with lesbians). I would never "rule out" a relationship with anyone of any gender, race, orientation, or religion because in so doing I would consider myself horribly closed-minded; however, there are definitely subsets which interest me more than others. To conclude I'm "gay", because other people need a label and that seems to be the most applicable and favourable one for me to take.

 

I don't think labels mean much but "being sexual" without boundries seems to be pretty 'bi' to me. Like Drewbie says, I acknowledge being a gay man if I'm asked...end of story. However, I also will admit that my social life is almost exclusively with other gay and lesbian friends. When you live in a community like Palm Springs (40% + of the population is GLBT) that's easy to do. And I believe that "safety in numbers" is a valid philosophy.

I have a strong personal, positive bias toward bisexuality. It's a loaded term and means different things to different people. It's also often derided in both the gay and straight communities. Thus, I don't use the label myself (apart from which by my own interpretation of it I don't quite meet the standards); however, according to my view/interpretation of it I personally would view it as the most favourable option (not only in terms of relationships/sex, but in terms of society, religion, and business) for humanity as a whole. However, paradoxically I could never actually attach more value to any of the traditional three lables (gay, straight, bi).

However, I also will admit that my social life is almost exclusively with other gay and lesbian friends. When you live in a community like Palm Springs (40% + of the population is GLBT) that's easy to do. And I believe that "safety in numbers" is a valid philosophy.

Actually same here. Socially I overwhelmingly spend more time with gays and lesbians. Indeed I couldn't help but find it a tad odd last week when I went to a straight club and saw men and women dancing with each other. Still, despite my recent, deep, almost exclusive immersion into the gay community I definitely am not opposed to, or disconcerted by, the straight community. I merely view this period in my life as a necessary, valuable, and fun counterbalence to my years of being almost exclusively surrended by "straight" people, institutions, and things.

 

The idea of not accepting a label of straight/bi/gay comes, I think, from a resistance to being put in a box. You love who you love, and you don't want to exclude a possible relationship because you've put a "wall" around yourself by implicitly telling people you are only interested in a subset of people.

Thank you, Graeme! That sums up my feelings and motives very well.

 

"Are you gay, str8, bi?"

 

"No, I'm Cody."

Always loved the character of Cody (I think he was my favourite), and that particular quote!

 

I, personally, don't have a problem with the "gay" label. I find that it's there to do what it's supposed to. All it does is

There are a lot of stereotypes that come with the label, but if you don't take the label too seriously, I think you're fine. So many people are afraid to match the stereotypes that they grow to become ashamed of who they are just because every now and then it just happens to match up. Just because it's a stereotype doesn't mean you have to avoid it like the plague; if it's who you are, it's who you are. As long as you're not purposely changing yourself to match up/not match up with it, I don't see a problem.

Excellent point, Raz!!

 

I also find that by embracing the negative terms, you rob people of their only real means of degrading you. Just as black people (notably rappers) fought racism by using 'nigger' amongst themselves, I think that 'fag' and 'faggot' can be useful to diffuse the negatives that go along with the label (although I know a lot of people will disagree with me on this one).

Oh my gosh! All I can say is:

 

"THANK YOU!"

 

for saying that! I usually feel like a complete alien, for espousing that view point in the gay community. Check out my blog entry on "The F-Word" for a more detailed account of how I feel on this issue.

 

What about web sites that ask us to label ourselves like GA? My profile says I'm "Gay". So, if I don't want to be labeled, why the heck did I do that? That best describes my "Sexuality". I could have put something else. Maybe one of the Bi categories, or "Still figuring it out", or "Ask me", or even "Not telling". I used it because "Gay" is what others on GA will understand. They are the ones asking me to label myself.

Well said! That's pretty much exactly how I feel as well.

I'm out to my folks. As of our Senior Ball on Saturday I'm out at school. I define "out" as having a boyfriend. Others may apply the "gay" label to me. Such is life.

awwww Yay for you! I hope you and Doug had an awesome time!

 

Bottom line, you are who YOU say you are. I'm gay, and that's all there is to it. You could be bisexual-leaning-towards-males-except-I-like-women-who-are-half-English-half-French. And you know what, that's totally cool with me. You probably have a very interesting love life.

Quite right, I think self-perception is often just as important - if not more so on some occasions - than actual reality. And I suppose I could almost fit that example, except I'd have a different subset of women lol.

 

Fascination subject, and excellent thoughts and comments raised by all!

 

Take care all and have a fantastic day!

Kevin

[Adrian Michaels]

Wow Kevin, You're like the quoting king!!

 

I haven't been able to get the quotey thing to work right for me... But I think I've figured it out...

[rknapp]

Wow Kevin, You're like the quoting king!!

 

I haven't been able to get the quotey thing to work right for me... But I think I've figured it out...

 

Lol, when I wanted to figure out the multi-quoting function, guess who lent a helping hand? haha

[colinian]

awwww Yay for you! I hope you and Doug had an awesome time!

 

Thanks, Kevin! We did have a totally amazing, wonderful time. It was a fantastic evening that we'll never forget.

 

Colin

[Demetz]

I find myself unimpressed by the movement to refuse labels. Labels facilitate communications. We use adjectives and nouns to tell other people about ourselves. Its one thing to say "well... I'm happy having sex with women too so I'm not homosexual, but I do like having sex with men so I'm not strictly heterosexual either" what you do in a case where a label doesn't fit is create a new adjective or adopt one to your purposes. Conveniently there already is one for that case where one likes both men and women. Bisexual. Your friend isn't refusing labels, he just picked a different one, with the same meaning. Why "bisexual" was not good enough for him... I don't know.

 

It doesn't degrade a person to acknowledge that they're gay, straight, or bi. Celebrating label refusal as though it makes a person better than those who do acknowledge what their sexuality is... other than creating an artificial area of contention... contributing to pointless conflict.