Let’s say you choose to be in a relationship with a person of the same sex. For heaven’s sake, don’t tell anybody that you chose to do so. Cynthia Nixon learned this the hard way:
The New York Times Magazine published a profile in which she was quoted as saying that for her, being gay was a conscious choice. Nixon is engaged to a woman with whom she has been in a relationship for eight years. Before that, she spent 15 years and had two children with a man.
“I understand that for many people it’s not, but for me it’s a choice, and you don’t get to define my gayness for me,” Nixon said while recounting some of the flak gay rights activists previously had given her for treading in similar territory. “A certain section of our community is very concerned that it not be seen as a choice, because if it’s a choice, then we could opt out. I say it doesn’t matter if we flew here or we swam here, it matters that we are here and we are one group and let us stop trying to make a litmus test for who is considered gay and who is not.”
To say that a certain segment of the gay community “is very concerned that it not be seen as a choice” is an understatement. Gay rights activists have worked hard to combat the idea that people decide to be physically attracted to same-sex partners any more than they choose to be attracted to opposite-sex ones because the question, so far unanswered by science, is often used by religious conservatives, including GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum and former candidate Michelle Bachman, to argue that homosexuality is immoral behavior, not an inherent trait.
Nixon is aware that telling the truth about her particular case is not acceptable to certain gay activists:
“A certain section of our community is very concerned that it not be seen as a choice, because if it’s a choice, then we could opt out. I say it doesn’t matter if we flew here or we swam here, it matters that we are here and we are one group and let us stop trying to make a litmus test for who is considered gay and who is not.”…
Predictably, Wayne Bessen, founder of the misnamed Truth Wins Out was not very happy with this:
“Cynthia did not put adequate thought into the ramifications of her words, and it is going to be used when some kid comes out and their parents force them into some ex-gay camp while she’s off drinking cocktails at fancy parties,” [said Truth Wins Out founder Wayne Besen.] “When people say it’s a choice, they are green-lighting an enormous amount of abuse because if it’s a choice, people will try to influence and guide young people to what they perceive as the right choice.”
Now, I’m not Cynthia Nixon. Neither is Wayne Bessen. Now there may be some scientific quibbles about the nature of free will and the nature of a person’s understanding of his own reasons for doing something. But those quibbles aside, I can say this quite confidently: nobody knows what’s going on in Cynthia Nixon’s head better than Cynthia Nixon. I have no reason to think that Nixon was saying anything other than the truth.
Neither does Wayne Bessen.
It is not for idiots like Bessen to tell people to shut up because they think the truth is going to harm their political goals.
People like Bessen must not be allowed to shut down the conversation about sexual preference (or any other topic). One important reason that we need to keep the topic of sexual preference open for complete and honest discussion is this: it will help us learn the truth about precisely what is the makeup of the human beast.
Wouldn’t that be wonderful? To have a better understanding of who we are as human beings? Well, we can’t have that without open discussion. And we won’t have that if fascists like Bessen have their way.
Here’s what Ann Althouse has to say about the founder of “Truth Wins Out”: Does he want truth to win out or something more like good policy or political pragmatism?
Althouse then reiterates a point she made previously. One which I quoted in Bias Incident: The World’s Most Politically Incorrect Novel:
By the way, I vividly remember back around 1990, the progressive gay-rights-type people I knew were intent upon portraying sexual orientation as a choice. I won’t name the famous lefty who snapped at me for entertaining the notion that homosexuality might have a biological basis: If it exists at the biological level, it will be perceived as a disease and people will try to cure it. That was really the same point as Besen’s, oddly enough, in that it was about acceptance as opposed to treatment.
Don’t worry, Cindy, maybe in a decade or two, activists like Bessen will allow you to tell the truth as you see it. Unfortunately, when that happens, those who think that the truth as they see it is that homosexuality is inborn will probably have to shut up (again).
Remember this if you remember anything else about this post: Truth is not a left wing value.
I just received a response from Mr. Besen regarding his attitude toward Ms. Nixon. He stated he could see what my real motives were when I expressed my disappointment in his stance toward homosexuality. I was standing up for Ms. Nixon and HER experience regarding homosexuality not HIS experience. Instead he showed himself as the petty and bigoted man he is by condeming her because she doesn’t fall into his idea of how things should be. He is no better than the religous right.
Very interesting. I think Nixon recanted somewhat (I was disappointed). “Shut up,” it seems has won out in this case.