Sexual preference is not a congenital trait — it’s not genetic. Sexual preference is also NOT a choice, per se.
That’s what I think, too. I think it’s a confluence of factors from social interactions in developmental and formative years and possibly some genetic predisposition. I think that overall you don’t choose sexual preference anymore than you choose to be shy or outgoing. The same way you don’t choose to like peas and hate broccoli. It’s complicated and there are innumerable factors, known and unknown.
But back to my point, which I haven’t quite gotten around to yet. My point is that it’s strange to me that gay activists see it as very natural for a straight person to at some point declare that they’re gay. However, the idea that someone can be gay and then go straight or declare themselves heterosexual is anathema. The very idea causes spittle of rage to form in the corners of angry mouths followed by shouting and accusations of homophobia and hatemongering. Seriously, it really pisses people off.
I guess it’s because of the political implications. And since the politics of these kinds of things are stated in Reader’s Digest-ible bites neither side can afford to give ground to common or uncommon sense. I wish there a middle ground camp in all of these large cultural debates.
It’s identity vs. behavior, politically speaking. If homosexuality is something you just do then you’re not afforded any … uh … what’s the word. You’re not afforded any credence as a social minority. But if it’s something you are then you have inalienable rights that must be protected by society that pertain to that group identity. At least that’s what it’s been boiled down to.
Oh well. Food for thought. And don’t forget that you can write your own comments in this blog by clicking the “Add your own” link beneath each entry. This could be a discussion as opposed to a diatribe.