Sexual
Orientation
Questions 71-80
Feel free to browse the following questions, some of which may
still await answers. You can then post an answer or counter an answer
that has already been posted. Please read the
guidelines for answering questions
before making a posting.
Previous 10 this topic
area 
Next
10 this topic area
THE
QUESTION:
SO80: I am a high school student doing research on
discrimination against homosexuals. I have run across a lot of
roadblocks in my town when trying to get information. Can any gay
people give me information/personal stories about discrimination they
have faced (not being allowed to marry, getting a job, etc.)? Please
be as detailed as possible about the circumstances and situation, how
you felt and what you learned from it.
POSTED OCT. 8, 1998
Sarah S., 17, Visalia, CA
ANSWER 1:
There are hundreds of books (not to mention web sites)
that address these basic issues. You might do a catalog search at
your library or a web search and do some basic reading. When you've
looked into the various types of discrimination we face (housing,
marriage, family, employment, benefits, rights to survive), I think
you should then come back to this forum and ask us more specific
questions, like "How do laws against recognition of your marriages
affect your personal life?" or "How does fear of gay-bashing affect
your behavior in public?"
POSTED OCT. 14, 1998
Becky T., lesbian, Indianapolis, IN
To respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
SO79: I have a six-year-old daughter who says she is "gay."
She has always said she wanted to marry a girl and has never
expressed an interest in boys in the "kissing way." She is very
feminine and loves dolls, etc. If she is gay, I want to support her
as best I can. Can I tell this early?
POSTED OCT. 5, 1998
Traci L., 32
<cptved@earthlink.net>,
Culver City, CA
ANSWER 1:
I think six years old is a little too young to be making
decisions about her whole life. Six-year-olds also want to be
astronauts and to be able to talk to animals. My younger brother told
me (age 7 or so) that he intended to have 16 children who would all
be limosine chauffers and could drive him to work. Kids also love to
test boundaries by saying things and watching your reaction, so don't
act too fazed. This is not to say your daughter may not grow up to be
les/bi. Hopefully, now that you have had a chance to think about this
at such an early stage, you will be able to give her all your support
and love if this turns out to be the case. Meantime, give her another
couple of years to work out who she is and who she wants to live the
rest of her life with.
POSTED OCT. 8, 1998
Iteki, female, 22, Irish, lesbian
<iteki@chickmail.com>
FURTHER NOTICE:
Traci, how wonderful of you to be so supportive of your
daughter. Many children know at an early age about their sexual
orientation - gay or straight. It is something that "just is." Your
daughter may or may not grow up and identify as a lesbian. The best
way to help her is to be open, as you appear to be, telling her that
she will know, and that it is OK with you if she falls in love with a
woman or a man. Reaffirm that there is nothing wrong with being a
lesbian, even if other people don't understand. There are many
age-appropriate story books that offer lesbian and gay characters,
and therefore a chance to support your daughter and where she is
right now, regardless of how she grows up.
POSTED OCT. 8, 1998
Karen M., 38, Human Rights Educator
<karen_morton@bc.sympatico.ca>,
Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I also think it's great that you are being so responsible
in your role as a parent. I just wanted to say that a child's
emerging sexuality at six doesn't necessarily reflect the adult
state. I used to have a crush on any man with slicked-black hair and
a black leather jacket when I was six. I also wanted to be a boy, but
these feelings didn't contradict because I didn't fully understand
either of them at that age. Now as an adult I don't want to be a boy
and I don't have a crush on Elvis or the Fonz anymore, either.
POSTED OCT. 22, 1998
A.A., Boston, MA
To respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
SO78: What does "Gay Pride" mean and why do we need a day to
celebrate this? I ask this because my family asked it of me, and I
have a hard time as a gay man putting it into words for them to fully
understand.
POSTED OCT. 5, 1998
Mick1, 44, gay male
<mick1@shaw.wave.ca>,
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
ANSWER 1:
Gay pride is something I celebrate every day, not just
during the annual summer Pride March in remembrance of the Stonewall
Inn uprising in New York. (Different states and countries hold Pride
Marches and Pridefests on different dates, but often during June).
October is Gay and Lesbian History Month, which includes National
Coming Out Day.
Just as black pride is not pride over skin color itself, gay pride
is not pride about one's sexual orientation per se. It is pride in
living our lives openly despite great disapproval and persecution. It
is persevering under hardship and creating our own extended families
of support and nurturance. It is fighting for our civil rights - to
hold jobs, marry, raise our children, serve our country, visit our
partners in the hospital, walk down the street without being beaten
or shot - to simply be who we are. It is living our lives with
integrity, celebrating their richness with joy and laughter, honoring
those who went before us and paving the way for the next generations
to come. It is valuing the rich diversity of our rainbow
community.
POSTED OCT. 8, 1998
DykeOnByke, lesbian
<DykeOnByke@aol.com>,
Southfield, MI
FURTHER NOTICE:
I think the main question is "What does it mean to you?"
As with any other holiday or traditional celebration, it is a matter
of personal choice whether you celebrate or not. The actual "Pride
March" stems from the Stonewall riots in the late '60s, which are
considered by many to be the starting point of the modern gay-rights
movement. Nowadays the march/festival is more a celebration of our
diversity and an excuse to party than an act of protest. A main point
of the march is to show "we're here." Visibility. A way to say "Look
who we are, we are your mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters,
teachers, doctors, builders, etc." It is a way to congratulate each
other for having the courage to show up, despite the influences in
society that say you have no right to live your life.
POSTED OCT. 8, 1998
Iteki, 22, female, Irish, lesbian
<iteki@chickmail.com>,
Stockholm, Sweden
To respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
SO77: To advocates of same-sex marriages: Many people believe
the government shouldn't prevent these marriages between consenting
adults. Should the government also prevent marriages between
consenting adults who are siblings? (Assume they are incapable
of reproducing.) If yes, why?
POSTED SEPT. 29, 1998
Mike R., 30, Williamsburg, VA
ANSWER 1:
Tough question. Given your assumption, the two issues do
appear to be similar. Look at the root causes, however. Incest is
prohibited by both religious and civil law because children of incest
could have serious health problems. That is a medical fact. It may be
true that two siblings could sue for the right to marry if they were
able to prove they couldn't have children. Most of us would still
object because we can't stomach the thought of marrying our own
sibling. The prohibition against gay or lesbian unions rests solely
on illogical "moral" ground. The arguments against it are not based
on medical facts and are not consistent across social or
denominational lines. That's the difference.
POSTED OCT. 12, 1998
M.H., 30, lesbian, Boston , MA
FURTHER NOTICE:
Should the government limit marriages between siblings?
Yes, primarily because of the inbreeding problem, but also, what
would be the need for siblings to marry? They would not, as same-sex
couples often are, be prohibited from visiting one another at the
hospital in emergencies; their last wishes and bequests would not be
ignored by blood relatives and courts; their agreed-upon custody
arrangements for one another's biological children would not be
ignored; they would face no danger of being permanently separated by
immigration authorities, and the list goes on and on. Think of all
the times you're asked, on forms and applications, for "next of kin"
or "relationship." You can put "brother" or "sister" there and not be
questioned. Just try to put your same-sex lifelong partner there and
see what happens!
POSTED OCT. 12, 1998
Becky, 55, married lesbian
<bthacker@iupui.edu>,
Indianapolis, IN
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
Siblings are not allowed to get married not for the
explicit reason that they can reproduce, but because they run
a high risk of creating children with mental or physical
disabilities. Gays and lesbians cannot reproduce (with each other)
and thus run no risk of producing children with mental or physical
disabilitiess. Gays and lesbians want legalized marriage for many
reasons, but the most compelling one is this: When you fall in love
with someone, you want to know you will be able to spend the rest of
your life together and not be torn apart because you don't have the
legal right to take care of each other if one is hospitalized, or
because the retirement home won't allow you to share a room, or
because some homophobic neighbor doesn't like "two guys" sharing the
house down the street (even though they both own it). I know. I've
been in a totally committed, love-filled relationship with one man
for 19 years, and at age 50 know that this will never change. Yes, I
fear being torn apart by insensitive, uncaring, bigoted bureaucrats
just because the government won't legally recognize a relationship
that exists anyway.
POSTED OCT. 12, 1998
Mike, German-American gay male, Dover, DE
FURTHER NOTICE 3:
I have to admit I had to think about the answer to this
one for a while - I have to say that sibling marriages should
continue to be prevented (even if reproduction is not an issue) for
the simple reason that, in the absence of a marriage, family members
often still have many of the same rights associated with marriage -
survivorship, health care, etc. The great thing about marriage (in
the purely partnership sense) is that it unites two people who
otherwise have no other legal ties, and it grants legal rights and
obligations as part of the marriage contract. Many of these rights
already exist for people who are already family members, and I see no
reason to allow marriage between siblings purely on the basis of the
set of rights granted by marriage. (Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer,
just an advocate of same-sex marriage, just as the original poster
requested.)
POSTED OCT. 12, 1998
Jeff M., 30, gay white male
<haljor@yahoo.com>, San
Francisco, CA
FURTHER NOTICE 4:
The U.S. government doesn't "prevent" same-sex marriages.
It simply does not grant people in these marriages the same special
rights it does people in heterosexual marriages. This is the central
question about same-sex marriages - are they the legal equivalent of
heterosexual marriages? As to your question, it sounds like you're
trying to draw a parallel between two types of relationship where
none exists beyond the involvement of "consenting adults." Gay
couples do have children. Sterile siblings don't. Gay couples come
from different families. Siblings don't. Gay marriages result from
relationships that (like straight ones) are hopefully enriching and
full of love. The sibling relationship you describe is most probably
the result of incest and molestation at an early age and is therefore
not on the same plane. The government should recognize same-sex
marriage. It should not encourage incest.
POSTED OCT. 12, 1998
Michael, 36, gay, white
<txmichael@worldnet.att.net>,
Houston, TX
FURTHER NOTICE 5:
As a gay man who advocates same-sex marriage, this is
something that I have thought of. My opinion has been that the
government's involvement in marriage has always been for reasons of
property. People married in the eyes of the state have rights
concerning the ownership of property, can make decisions for ill
spouses, have rights of inheritance and are able to do many things
jointly. Many will say that same-sex couples can work these things
out, but this usually involves costly legal contracts. Why should a
loving, committed same-sex couple have to jump through hoops, when
all a man and woman have to do is pay a small license fee and get
married? Opponents of same-sex marriage will usually say it's against
God's will or that the purpose of marriage is to bear and raise
children. First of all, the government should not recognize God's
will in our laws; separation of church and state is in the
Constitution. Second, if using the argument that the purpose is
bearing and rearing children, then it would seem that they are saying
those unwilling or incapable of having children should not be allowed
to marry. It is up to everyone's beliefs whether they think that
same-sex couples should be able to marry in the eyes of their church,
but if the government is going to recognize marriage, it should be
done without regard to sex. We are all guaranteed equal protection
under the law. Would this allow siblings to marry? Maybe. It's a
tough issue. Look at just the legal facts though, leaving out
religion and children, and try to explain how the government can deny
benefits to any couple based on their sex.
POSTED OCT. 12, 1998
Toby J., 33, gay white male
<jtobey@hotmail.com>,
Omaha, NE
FURTHER NOTICE 6:
Part of this depends on what you mean by marriage. As far
as I can tell it's a) a religious ceremony b) a number of different
cultural institutions and c) various legal contracts between
individuals governing mutually held property, inheritance, care of
children and a handful of other things. (Right of attorney, etc.)
Frankly, I think our country is already way too far into the
religious and cultural bits. That isn't its place - any religious
organization should be able to decide if they are willing to perform
a marriage ceremony for any two people. (There are a number that
perform weddings for homosexual couples; I don't know of any that
have performed weddings for siblings.) Culture has to do with how the
people around you feel about it, and shouldn't be written into law.
The only place where the state should have any say is in the drawing
up of legal contracts between various individuals, and I can't see
how the biological relationship of individuals, their gender or even
the number involved should have much bearing on such a contract.
(It's worth noting that I don't think it's the state's business,
either, who is sleeping with whom as long as everyone involved is a
consenting adult. Though perhaps writing monogamy in as a condition
of the legal contract would be a good thing for some people.) So, as
far as the siblings go: I think a religious wedding should be the
decision of their church (if they have one - whether or not they can
have a religious wedding without one is a little confusing). I think
they'll probably get a fair bit of criticism from the people around
them, which might in itself be enough to dissuade them. It's not an
idea I'm altogether comfortable with, to say the least. I think the
"legal wedding" shouldn't be anything more than the drawing up of a
set of legal documents, and the state doesn't have any business
denying them that on the basis of their genetic relationship.
POSTED OCT. 12, 1998
Catherine, 25, white bisexual married female
<tylik@eskimo.com>,Woodinville,
WA
FURTHER NOTICE 7:
Putting aside the genetic repercussions, I believe incest
needs to be off limits legally because the home is meant to be a safe
haven for the children being raised in it. Children are not ready for
sex until they mature, and while they are still in the home they need
familial support. If marriage between siblings and other close
relations is permitted, there will be no way the family as it is
currently structured can function properly, because sexual desire
will cloud the necessary support a family is supposed to give. I
believe a family consists of children, and a support system of adults
who love them and care for them. This support system can be a man and
a woman, or a same-sex couple or whatever, as long as they understand
their responsibility to the children involved. Same-sex marriages are
based on love and commitment, just as opposite sex marriages are.
Think about it: A person wants to pledge the entire duration of
his/her life to someone. This is not something that could in any way
be based solely on the desire for kinky sex. It greatly saddens me
that you would even think of comparing something as beautiful as love
to something like incest.
POSTED OCT. 12, 1998
A. Browne, 20, black female
<abrowne@sophia.smith.edu>,
Northampton, MA
FURTHER NOTICE 8:
I have nothing against sibling marriages. I think that if
they find the love we all search for between them, then go for it.
But I do get why they are outlawed. I think the government wanted to
keep the number of children with birth defects as low as it could.
However, if they can prove they can't have children, whatever floats
your little boat.
POSTED OCT. 19, 1998
Tiffany
<celticcutie@hotmail.com>,
Asheville, NC
To respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
SO76: How common is it for lesbians to date female bisexuals?
How common is it for lesbians dating bisexuals to possess a deep fear
their partner will inevitably leave them for a man? What can
bisexuals do to overcome this fear?
POSTED SEPT. 28, 1998
Cerelia, 16, bisexual, Victoria, Canada
ANSWER 1:
I don't believe any survey has ever been done on the
subject. Therefore, I am only stating my overall impression (with
numerous exceptions) that most older lesbians and lifelong lesbians
prefer to date other lesbians, while younger lesbians and lesbians
who have been married or have been sexually involved with a man at
some point seem more open to dating bisexual women as well as
lesbians.
Dating, however, is not the same as partnering. Lesbians who
readily date bisexual women may not be interested in partnering with
them (or in partnering at all). I suspect part of this is due to
stereotypes that bisexual women are either not monogamous or not
capable of staying in a committed, long-term same-sex relationship
when the going gets tough.
Some lifelong lesbians may also exhibit an "ick" factor. The
thought of their being sexual with a man is so alien or disgusting to
them, that even sleeping with a woman who has been sexual with a man
or at least currently self-defines as bisexual makes them feel
"unclean" or "icky" toward her. In my experience, lesbians who either
torment themselves with comparisons between themselves and their
partner's past male lover or fear abandonment for a male lover, often
suffer from low self-esteem or feelings of inadequacy. They may need
constant reassurance that they are desirable, that you "prefer"
women, don't flirt with men behind their backs or that they are
incredible lovers. That's a pretty tall order.
POSTED SEPT. 30, 1998
DykeOnByke, 48, formerly married lesbian
<DykeOnByke@aol.com>,
Southfield, MI
To respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
SO75: To people of all sexual orientations: How acceptable is
it to experiment sexually with someone who cares about you, solely
for the purpose of determining your sexual preferences?
POSTED SEPT. 28, 1998
Cerelia, 16, bisexual, Victoria, Canada
ANSWER 1:
I would not recommend this if it is someone who has a
genuine romantic interest in you. On the other hand, if it is someone
who cares for you as a friend and also wants to explore more to see
if something develops, it may be OK. I would talk to the person and
be very clear about where I'm coming from. If she fully understands
the situation, then she has the right to make the personal choice to
take the risk and go ahead with it, and so do you.
POSTED SEPT. 29, 1998
Jessica, female, 26, bisexual
<jessica@pioneeris.net>,
NY, NY
FURTHER NOTICE:
For me, absolutely unacceptable, Cerelia. It disregards
your partner as anything but a tool for your own use - a sexual
object.
POSTED SEPT. 30, 1998
Al, 59, straight
<alarose@ncwc.edu>, Rocky
Mount, NC
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
Your question is pretty specific: To experiement sexually
for the purpose of figuring out your own sexual orientation. I think
using a person sexually for any reason is not acceptable. If you are
attracted to a person, and they are attracted to you, and it
naturally grows into a sexual relationship that is mutual, then that
is OK - even if you are not sure of how you want to label yourself
(gay, straight, bi). But I think "using" a person sexually for any
reason is not acceptable.
POSTED NOV. 2, 1998
Annie, 28, lesbian, MI
To respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
SO74: I know a man in his twenties who I have never seen be
attracted to a woman. He says that he is in love with a famous person
he has never met and plans to one day marry her. People have
suggested to me that he could be finding an excuse to keep from being
with real women because he is gay and doesn't realize it. Could this
be true?
POSTED SEPT. 28, 1998
L.P., female, 29, CA
ANSWER 1:
Mistrust amateur psychologists. They can't tell you what
he had for breakfast that morning, but they're willing to tell you
his innermost, secret motivations? One is not convinced of his
contact with reality, but he may be telling the truth as he sees
it.
POSTED SEPT. 30, 1998
Al, 59
<alarose@ncwc.edu>, Rocky
Mount, NC
To respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
SO73: Why do so many kids my age (14-18) seem to have problems
with their sexual preference?
POSTED SEPT. 23, 1998
Destiny, Los Lunas, N.M.
ANSWER 1:
If all we see in our world are examples of heterosexual
reltionships (i.e. in the home, on TV, in magazines and books, etc.),
and our own feelings are not decidedly heterosexual, then the
confusion arises. When questioning teens have homophobic parents (or
even parents who have never said anything about gays, either for or
against) then it becomes extremely hard to talk to them about the
feelings one is experiencing. If you can't even talk to your family
because you are afraid of their response/reaction, then you may not
try to experiment until you are on your own with no financial ties to
your family. There have been way too many incidents of children
literally thrown into the snow, disowned by their families because
they are gay. My first girlfriend had a similar reaction from here
mother. When she came out to her mother as gay at 17, her mother put
a hit out on her life! I had a converstion with a born-again
Christian woman one time who told me that if her daughter came home
with a female lover, she would never allow her daughter back into the
family again. Therefore, there are a lot of kids who will not explore
that side of themselves while they still live with their families. I
don't understand how a parent could throw their own child away like
that - or worse yet, order the murder of their own child - but then,
that is something I know I would never do if I had a child.
POSTED OCT. 6, 1998
Garet B., 27, gay woman
<garetdw@webtv.net>, St.
Petersburg, FL
FURTHER NOTICE:
I think that so many people our age (14-18) seem to have
problems with their sexual preference because at this age, we're
confused about a lot of things. People our age are experimenting with
different religions, styles of clothing, etc., trying to "find
ourselves," to know who we are and how we fit into society. Sexual
preference is just another facet of ourselves that we explore at this
age.
POSTED NOV. 23, 1998
Ren, 14-18 age range, questioning everything, North Miami Beach,
FL
To respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
SO72: What is the connection the gay community (particularly
gay men) has to the movie The Wizard of Oz? I have seen
t-shirts about this, and my gay friends talk about it, often assuming
I know what they mean, but I don't.
POSTED SEPT. 5, 1998
Jodi, 26, Toledo , OH
ANSWER 1:
I think the connection derives from the phrase "a friend
of Dorothy's," which is slang/code for someone who is gay. Another
phrase I've heard is "on the bus," as in "he's on the bus"; again,
referring to the fact that someone is gay. There are undoubtedly many
more expressions like these.
POSTED SEPT. 7, 1998
John; 48, straight, white
<voiceman@electrotex.com>,
Houston, TX
FURTHER NOTICE:
The Stonewall Rebellion, the last Sunday in June 1969,
where drag queens and other gay people revolted against police
repression at the Stonewall Inn in Greenwich Village, NYC, coincided
with the death of Judy Garland, who, of course, starred in The
Wizard of Oz. Some gay historians suggest that grief over
Garland's (already a gay icon) death provided the emotional rage
needed to stand up against years of abuse by corrupt NYC cops. The
Stonewall Rebellion is considered the starting point of the modern
gay rights movement, and is why Gay Pride Day occurs (or at least is
supposed to occur) on the last Sunday of every June.
POSTED SEPT. 9, 1998
Chuck, gay male, San Francisco, CA
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I think the reason many gay men connect with The Wizard
of Oz is simple: It stars Judy Garland (a diva of her time), and
it is so campy! Sure, there are other reasons such as Dorothy's view
of herself as an outsider who dreams about another world where she
and other outsiders come together in a sense of community, and the
prevailing sentiment that the creator of The Wizard of Oz must
have dropped lots of acid to create such a colorful, campy,
over-the-top movie as this one. However, I think the main reason has
to be the overall camp quality of the movie. And many gay men
recognize and appreciate good camp. Just thinking about the house
falling down on the Wicked Witch and Dorothy getting the ruby
slippers or the scene with the poppy fields (think drugs) brings a
wry smile to my face.
POSTED SEPT. 10, 1998
Tony, 36, gay black male
<tonyway@yahoo.com>, San
Francisco, CA
FURTHER NOTICE 3:
All the comments above are accurate, however, remember the
film debuted in the late '30s. Phrases like "friend of Dorothy" came
about later. If Judy were the only draw, then there would logically
be similar affection for her string of films with Mickey Rooney, or
other accomplishments. I believe the answer lies in the resonance
many gay men feel with the plot: A young person, persecuted for her
affections, seeks to find a place where she can be accepted and
explore herself, but once discovered longs for the simplicity of her
former life, only to find that everything she sought was in her heart
all along. It mirrors the coming-out experience for many gay men,
myself included, who felt uncomfortable in their family life and
searched for meaning in the big wide gay world, frequently to be
disappointed with what they found, ultimately to return to the
comfort and nurturing of a "family" environment (frequently a close
circle of friends, or a significant relationship).
POSTED OCT. 5, 1998
Doug L., 35, gay white male, Phoenix, AZ
To respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
SO71: Can a man wear women's pantyhose or clothing and still
be truly heterosexual? Or does this mean he has homosexual feelings
he is not expressing?
POSTED SEPT. 5, 1998
Female, white, twenty-something , IL
ANSWER 1:
It's not the clothes that make the gay man. Since
cross-dressing is not necessarily a sexual thing, transvestites can
be straight or gay. Cross-dressing could be an indicator of gender
identity disorder or gender dysphoria, but that doesn't mean the
person is not heterosexual. If the cross-dressing is for sexual
excitement, it is called transvestic fetishism. Heterosexual
men can be totally turned on by the feel or fit of women's clothing
but still have no romantic or sexual attraction to other men.
POSTED SEPT. 10, 1998
Rex T., 35, keeps pantyhose in the Halloween costume closet
<rex_tremende@hotmail.com>
Cincinnati , OH
To respond
BACK TO TOP