Cynthia Nixon’s Comments Prove We Still Don’t Know How To Talk About Sexual Identity

[xchrom]

http://thinkprogress.org/alyssa/2012/01/27/412318/cynthia-nixons-comments-prove-we-still-dont-know-how-to-talk-about-sexual-identity/



The LGBT blogosphere has been wrestling with comments made by actress Cynthia Nixon (immortally Sex in the City‘s ”Miranda”) to the New York Times that she chose to be a lesbian:

I gave a speech recently, an empowerment speech to a gay audience, and it included the line ‘I’ve been straight and I’ve been gay, and gay is better.’ And they tried to get me to change it, because they said it implies that homosexuality can be a choice. And for me, it is a choice. 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. 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.

She doubled down in an interview with the Daily Beast, but in a way that helped clarify where she’s really coming:

I don’t pull out the “bisexual” word because nobody likes the bisexuals. Everybody likes to dump on the bisexuals… but I do completely feel that when I was in relationships with men, I was in love and in lust with those men. And then I met Christine and I fell in love and lust with her. I am completely the same person and I was not walking around in some kind of fog. I just responded to the people in front of me the way I truly felt.

The negative reaction from gay blogs seems understandable, but perhaps unwarranted. Undoubtedly, as the gay community argues in courts across the country that homosexuality is immutable and ex-gay therapy is harmful and ineffective, having a prominent celebrity and activist say she “chose” to be gay is a little off-message. But I think it’s pretty clear that’s not what she meant, and so the real problem is that even within the gay community, we still have a very shallow understanding of sexual identity.



*** my own view is that she is bi -- not gay.
and she shouldn't speak for gay people about that.
she may not LIKE the word bi -- but that's what she is.

[peacebird]

1. I think people put too much emphasis on labels sometimes. Does it matter if she is called gay vs bi?

She self identifies as gay. I know other women who were married to men and only came out as gay late in life... Were they not gay?
I know it bothers some folks that she used the word "chose" to describe her change from hetero to gay. I get that, because the antigay people always claim homosexuality is a choice, and you can be "cured" and made straight. But it is HER truth she was speaking, HER path.
I say it is her life, and she gets to define herself.

[xchrom]

2. hmmm -- well i'm gay not bi or lesbian.

i wouldn't dream of trying to explain either of those to the outside world or even other gay men.

and while she gets to say what ever she wants -- she is appearing uneducated.

is that a good thing?

[peacebird]

3. Uneducated? Why? Because she says she is gay? Could it not be that when she met her partner

She fell in love?



But regardless i don't understand your comment.....

[xchrom]

4. the issue isn't whether or not she says she is gay -- the issue is that she says

that it is a 'choice'.

you understand that is fairly offensive to a good number of gay and lesbian people right?

[peacebird]

6. Your original post - that we still don't know how to talk about sexual identity, was spot on

You cannot let this one woman define her own sexual identity. Instead you call her names like "uneducated".

How is that advancing the discussion of sexual identity?

[JackintheGreen]

12. I sort of agree with XChrom on this

Saying that Nixon comes off as "uneducated" isn't name-calling (calling her "an idiot" would be). It's a statement of appearances. Nixon DOES come off as uneducated, specifically as uneducated about how the word "choice" is used against the LGBT community.

If we've learned anything from Frank Luntz it's that words mean things, and the meaning can be shaped by partisan ideologies. Nixon's choice of words gives ammunition to homophobes who think that homosexuality is something someone decides to do. "Well, if Cynthia Nixon chose to be gay, you can decide to be straight." It is ignorant to assume that her words won't be seen in that way by a significant segment of the population, so what she said publicly was damaging.

So yes, she comes off as ignorant. Ignorant of the cultural and semantic surround of the debate about gay rights. Tone-deafness is a kind of ignorance. Her later explanation did clarify her feelings. Given what she said, I would define her as a bisexual who chooses to engage in one side of her actionable spectrum. But she's correct in this, too: I have ZERO right define her sexuality, and it's none of my business to do so.

[peacebird]

14. Well said, thank you

[La Lioness Priyanka]

17. to be fair, she said its a choice for her but not for all people

[zazen]

7. I agree, peacebird; maybe she means she chooses actions, not feelings

I take issue with the essentialism implied by this rigid demand that it always be "biological," as if sexual identity, experience, attraction, etc., is always that fixed. Historically this is just not accurate.

Was Socrates gay? Bisexual? A pedophile? Greek men routinely had sex with boys we would now call underage and reserved the home-bound women as "breeders." (They also had sex with girls who are underage too, but the sex with boys was elevated in their literature.) Was 80% of the ancient Greek landowning male population "gay" and in denial? When women were allowed intense emotional relationships with other women--and I think in some cultures and in some times, like the late 19th century, almost encouraged to, while married to men--are they gay? Bisexual? In some Latin cultures a much greater level of affection between female friends is allowed. Are they repressing something? Lying to themselves?

Is it possible that in some people, feelings equal identity and actions must follow from them, whereas in others, feelings and urges feel more detached from choices? Maybe those with much stronger sex drives feel a stronger particular identity, while those without feel they can change midstream. This insistence that we're born with a particular boxed in sexuality denies how our sexuality is constructed socially and through early childhood experiences. I believe there's a complex blend of biological drives, imprinted neural pathways from early childhood, and conscious choices later in life. I know other women who've been in long-term lesbian relationships who feel the same way.

I just think we're going to look back at this time and see that people were put into too rigid boxes, and the sanctimonious piling on this woman who was brave enough to speak her own truth, knowing she'd get pilloried, makes me queasy.

* On edit, I'm not calling xchrom sanctimonious, because that wasn't the tone of the post, though I think other critics of Nixon have been. I do disagree with xchrom's characterization, however.

[yardwork]

5. I don't have a problem with her saying that she chose to be gay.

I'm a lesbian who was married to a man for decades. I identify as a lesbian. I believe that I've been a lesbian all my life and didn't realize it, for various reasons, until middle age. I don't identify as bi. I don't say that I chose to be gay, but I did choose to act on my feelings once I recognized them. I chose to embrace my identity, leave my marriage, and come out to the world as gay. While my orientation is not a choice, how I acted on it and how I live are choices.

I believe that many gay people and allies shy away from the word "choice" because the right has succeeded in demoralizing us to the point where we feel obligated to insist that we didn't "choose" to "be this way." That is very close to saying, "It's not my fault!"

Right-wing homophobes don't get to decide how I define myself. They have a right to choose to be right-wing homophobes. I have a right to choose who I love and how I define myself.

Having the freedom to say "I chose to be gay and there's nothing you can do about it" is another step away from homophobia. This can be particularly important for women, who tend to move through life trying to please other people and conform to social mores. It's a kind of liberation to say "I choose this life."

[zazen]

8. beautifully put

"Right-wing homophobes don't get to decide how I define myself. They have a right to choose to be right-wing homophobes. I have a right to choose who I love and how I define myself."

You're right. They seem to be setting the terms of the debate.

What's really weird to me is that the right-wing fixation, especially among the men, has this whistling past the graveyard quality. They talk about "choice" so much that it makes me think the married men are constantly fantasizing about sex with men but restraining themselves because of some faux Christian code.

Ironically, I think the "biological destiny" essentialist box actually allows men to hold onto traditional masculinity more, because they can just say, hey, I'm so straight I have no control over it (and thus, so extremely traditionally heterosexual and all of the privileges that issue from that identity.) I'd have thought the uptight men in the right-wing community would embrace the (socio)biology argument. I know more traditional guys outside of it use that argument. . . "it's my biology--that's why I (fill in the blank---use degrading porn, cheat, leave my wife for a younger woman)."

That's my problem with the essentialist argument. As a radical feminist, I'm not willing to concede that it's all biological. There's too much bad behavior that sustains male dominance that's justified as helpless acting out of biological urges. To be consistent, I have to apply that standard to all issues related to sexuality, however unrelated it may seem.

[yardwork]

38. Very interesting points regarding feminism and the role of the biological destiny idea.

[xchrom]

13. i get what you're saying -- and i have tremendous respect for you -- and in my own life

my sexual experiences have been all over the map.

but i have never been anything but gay. not bi or anything else -- i could not choose to be anything but gay.

the Gay part of me is not in my plumbing -- well it might be now that i'm not so young, but that's a different topic.

the Gay part of me was never in my plumbing.

i have to ask -- is there a legitimate reparative therapy?

why the difficulty with saying bi? she is not gay -- or lesbian -- she is bi.

and i'm totally in line with sexuality existing on a spectrum -- but i don't see what i'm saying as contradicting that at all but designations are important - words have meaning.

[yardwork]

36. I think that we're in agreement on slightly different points.

I completely agree with you that people are what they are - we don't choose our affectional orientation. I put it that way - affectional orientation - because I agree with you that this is so much more than plumbing.

I'm totally opposed to suggesting anything like reparative therapy to anybody. That is psychological and physical abuse and torture, imo.

What I'm saying is taking the step a little further, a little more radical. So what if it were a choice? It's our choice whether it's a choice or not. Nobody else gets to decide.

[xchrom]

37. Yes. & this is where I wish she had embraced her 'bi' ness.

Bi is not gay nor straight.

And while gay or straight may have sexual crossings - they are not bi.

Her statement ultimately doesn't take away from gay or straight people - but I feel there is a diminishing of bi people.

For all my wild ways - I'm gay.

For all her wild ways - she's bi.

There's is for the uninitiated crossover - but they are not the same.

I'm not as clear as I want to be on this yet- but I'm getting there.

[jumptheshadow]

15. "Right-wing homophobes don't get to decide how I define myself."

The LGBT community doesn't get to decide how to define myself, either. As for Cynthia Nixon -- can't we focus on her integrity and the positive force she has been for our community instead of sniping at her? She reportedly chose her words carefully and feels very strongly that she used the accurate words to describe her experience.

My partner knew she was gay from the time she was a little girl. There is absolutely no way you could have changed her. Her identity has been unwavering.

As for me? Although I now define myself as a lesbian, there have been times when I was bi, in my conscious moments and my dreams, and times when I identified as a heterosexual female. Dreams are key for me, and believe me, I have been in all three camps in my subconscious.

Straight is easier in many ways, but gay is better for me. I prefer the gay life.

Can't we just say that it's wrong for fundamentalists to force their views on either people who were born gay or people who made a conscious choice?

I hope that, a couple decades down the road, the semantics and rigidity of our characterizations of people will change.

Xchrom, there's nothing personal here, I respect you, I just don't agree with you this time around.

[joeybee12]

18. I think you chose to accept that you're gay...

Cynthia Nixon really does not know what she's talking about.

[jumptheshadow]

32. Absolutely right on (nt)

[no_hypocrisy]

9. Could this controversy actually be rooted in mere semantics,

that is, Nixon's choice of words. She could be on the same page as Ellen Degeneres, who came out and claimed her personal identity, saying she could not lie about who she really is. Nixon and Degeneres may mean the same thing but said it differently. Nixon may have meant that she chose not to live a lie of being heterosexual when she is really either bisexual or gay. To clarify, I'd like to have the discussion developed further by Nixon.

[joeybee12]

19. If she means she cose to accept being gay, that's one thing...

Either she's very bad with words, stubborn, clueless, or a combination of all 3.

[William769]

10. Your going to have two problems in this thread xchrom.

Last edited Sat Jan 28, 2012, 11:26 AM - Edit history (1)

And since I'm in my happy place today, I'm just going to let them post their drivel because that's what it is. Have at it Y'all.

[yardwork]

11. Are you saying that anybody who disagrees with the OP is posting drivel?

In that case, I'm glad that you are choosing to stay out of this.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

16. i think she very clearly states that for some people its not a choice

but for her it is. which is fair.

i dont think there is a moral imperative to be straight, whether or not there is choice involved.

[closeupready]

24. Completely agree. Lets all not forget, she is just one person.

She is not Barney Frank or Tammy Baldwin or David Geffen. She's a film personality who lives her own life in the way that she wants to, she perceives herself as she understands life, I'm fine with that. Much as I would be fine with that if she were just another person on the street.

Her anecdotal experience does not in any way negate the reality of myself and millions of other gay people who know that they have never been anything but 100% gay, end of story.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

25. i think there is a gender aspect to this as well

in my experience, more women tend to be sexually fluid and therefore see more choices than men..again, this is anecdotal and not to say that i dont know lesbians who are definitely more 100% gay and see no choice in this matter (lisa, for instance)

[jumptheshadow]

30. Very true, also some people consider themselves "pansexual"

But, I guess, that's just another "boxy" word. Twenty years from now, hopefully we will be more forgiving of differences within our community.

[ruggerson]

20. Totally agreed - she's bi and what she said was totally dishonest

She hasn't "been straight" she hasn't "been gay" - she's bisexual.

Having sex with a woman (or even attempting a relationship with one) wouldn't make me "straight."

She's a bisexual woman who has had relationships with both genders.

[xchrom]

21. +1

[Zorra]

22. + another 1 nt

[William769]

23. + another 1 nt

[mitchtv]

27. +1

I think she chose to act on her attraction, I doubt that she chose to be Gay and then went out and found her woman.

[beyurslf]

26. I think she should be free to chose whatever she wants, and I am not offended that she says she

chose to be gay. Wouldn't it be nice to live in a society where I could chose to be gay and still be treated the same? That's what i get from her statements. it should not matter "why" i am gay--whether by birth or by choice--because it does not make me a bad person.

[jumptheshadow]

28. +1 (nt)

[Fearless]

29. It sounds like she has some growing and experiencing yet to do...

Which isn't a bad thing. But, it seems like she takes to heart the negative statements made against bisexuals in defending her own sexuality. This is unfortunate. Granted not every road is easy, yet to deny oneself of that journey out of fear of reprisal, is nearly criminal. I hope she finds that she can be proud of who she is, despite what some may say of her.

[jumptheshadow]

31. She is telling us...

she is proud of the decisions she made in her life, and doesn't have to defend them to anybody. She is doing this at the same time she is making tremendous contributions to the rights of individuals to make their own choices in consensual relationships without buying into groupthink. Look at the photos of her on red carpets with her fiance. She has been very honest about who she is.

[Fearless]

33. I don't mean it in that sense...

The issue I take is with this part:

"I don’t pull out the “bisexual” word because nobody likes the bisexuals. Everybody likes to dump on the bisexuals… but I do completely feel that when I was in relationships with men, I was in love and in lust with those men. And then I met Christine and I fell in love and lust with her."

IMHO, because "nobody likes the bisexuals" is a horrible reason to avoid using the word. If she does enjoy both men and women, then I think everyone agrees that she is bisexual. My previous response tried to say that she needs to let go of what people may think.

Personally I don't care about labels, call yourself what you want. But to say that not calling oneself bisexual because of what others say, as is how I read the passage, is something that is grown out of, like calling oneself bisexual when young and afraid to call oneself gay (which is fairly common in my experience).

[jumptheshadow]

34. Okay, fair enough (nt)

[originalpckelly]

35. Who you date and have sex with is a choice.

However, who you actually are attracted to is not.