A British journalist says she finally realized the value of same-sex marriage after falling in love with a man – despite previously identifying as gay.
On The Guardian‘s Comment is free website, Helen Bell writes:
I’ve always wanted to end up with someone interesting, clever, funny, attractive, liberal-minded and, above all, kind. My partner is all of those things. Having been gay all my life, I just wasn’t expecting him to be male. … [Entirely by accident], I fell in love with a man. It took me a week and a half to ask him out for incredibly awkward coffee and bagels. His exact quote on the subject: “I liked you an awful lot, but as far as I was aware … you were a lesbian.” Good point, sir.
Ms Bell never cared much for the idea of marriage. But now “ridiculously happy” in love, she wants to marry – and in having this desire, she’s come to the conclusion that to deny gay men and women the same legal rights to marriage as straight couples is an injustice:
Now, I see the point [in marriage], because my partner and I want, eventually, to get married. It’s because we want to be partners, in law, and in public. We want the shared custody of any children we have. We want to be allowed to visit each other in hospital, and take joint responsibility of our finances. None of this is because we have a more inherently serious relationship than any I had with a woman. It’s because there’s already an institution which allows us to have these things. … I am still the same person I was when I went out with women. Why, then, am I a better class of citizen now that my partner is a man?
Perhaps Ms Bell could teach something to the many “ex-gays” who, claiming to have changed their sexual orientation through prayer or therapy, respond by actively – and often viciously – opposing equal rights for others?
I feel compelled to point out that in no way is this woman a Lesbian. You can’t be gay or a lesbian and suddenly love the opposite sex. That’s not how that works. She is bisexual. Which means she has a choice to be with either one. She can be with men so she is now. When you’re gay you are completely polarized against having any sexual relations with the opposite sex. It makes you physically ill to think about it just like homosexual sex makes those who are polarized as straight nauseated. It’s nice that she is supporting what she should have supported from the beginning, but loving a man is something no lesbian will do, a bisexual will do it. Just like those reports of ex-gay men marrying women and having a great family life with kids they produced themselves. Those men are also bisexual, and claiming they were converted is a lie.
You don’t really get to say what being gay is, at least for anyone other than yourself. That’s not your place. Many gay men and women have been with members of the opposite sex, yet still identify as gay. Many people are uncomfortable taking on the bisexual label if their attractions aren’t evenly split. If I’m attracted to 1 woman for every 99 men, it would probably be easier for me to identify as gay, both for my own benefit and for others, simply for the sake of simplicity and clarity.
It’s certainly not your place to say what sexual acts should make someone feel physically ill. I think there are plenty of straight people who aren’t nauseated by thoughts of gay sex, and plenty of gay people who aren’t nauseated by the idea of straight sex. These aren’t concrete definitions by any stretch of the imagination.
What Jay said (more or less).
The problem is that these ex-gay groups aren’t about only giving their services to those who want to change, but rather believe that all gay people should change and should go through their programs. Making life hard for people who are openly gay is crucial because the more accepting society in general is the less people are going to feel like they have to change. The hardliners need an anti gay environment to sustain their numbers.
More to the point, the proponents of orientation change are going far beyond “sexual orientation can change,” and promoting the idea that sexual orientation can be made to change. There’s a huge difference, and the evidence for the latter claim is poor.
I wish her the best!
Unlike mixed-orientation “marriages” this is a natural relationship. One where she found someone, was attracted physically, emotionally, and intimately to them, and with this new situation realized her sexuality was more complex than she thought before. Unlike the antigays, she’s not with someone out of a desire to repress themselves, or waive a certificate of completion, or trap themselves in a heterosexual emulation so they can’t “be” who they actually are, etc.
I agree with the assertion of a previous commentator, although I’d remove the fangs and venom. Clearly, she can’t identify as a homosexual anymore- unless she is consciously choosing to be in an opposite gender relationship despite having no physical or natural attraction to her partner.
She’d likely identify herself as bisexual, although one by surprise. I hope they have a good life! /O/