?

Log in

Intro - The Queer by Choice Community [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
The Queer by Choice Community

[ website | QueerByChoice.com ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Intro [Jul. 28th, 2009|11:30 pm]
The Queer by Choice Community

queerchoice

[blindcreator]
Hi my name is Eric and I'm new to this LJ community. I've been really pissed off by my assimilationist LGB peers and I am sick of them using the idea of the gay 'gene' as an excuse and justification to assimilate into mainstream culture. I feel like they're victimizing themselves and giving away their power. They're also telling the rest of the world that they cannot be LGB or queer without a scientific explanation.

I'm majoring in Languages & Cultures and minoring in Queer Studies at California State University Northridge. We just started this minor last Fall and I am having trouble getting my peers interested. Any tips on recruiting?
linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: songquake
2009-07-29 10:44 pm (UTC)
wow, dude, i'm sorry that you got spammed on your first post. that really sucks.

i'm not sure that there's a lot that can be done in terms of "convincing" -- my argument generally goes like this: if the gay gene is the only reason we have the right to form the kind of relationships we want, then it basically validates the argument that there is something wrong/disordered about the relationships themselves, but we can't help it. which ends us in a slippery slope -- for if pedophilia or sociopathy is considered a disease for which succumbing to symptoms is criminal (and it is considered thus by the APA and then by law enforcement and community standards), then why wouldn't the desire to form sexual relations with someone of a similar gender be considered a disease for which succumbing to symptoms is illegal?

it also assumes that if there were choice involved, we would OF COURSE choose heterosexuality. which i think is a pretty self-debasing assumption. it shows a real lack of self-esteem and LACK OF RESPECT TO ONE'S PARTNERS to say that one would choose to be in another kind of relationship, but have no choice in the matter. not to mention erasing the existence of people who are attracted to persons of a variety of genders.

i would point peers towards foucault's history of sexuality vol. 1, because i think he makes some excellent points regarding how homosexuality was both criminalized and pathologized in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries particularly. also, i would read some books on disability activism -- stuff like "nothing about us without us," and so on.

also, one can compare choice of sexual partners to choice of food: i have had sexual encounters with men, women, transfolks. some of the encounters i have enjoyed more than others. i have generally enjoyed the encounters with women most, and the encounters with those originally diagnosed as male least (regardless of transition status). does this make me lesbian? not quite. does it make me bisexual? no, because i acknowledge more than two genders. does it allow for me to someday sustain a heterosexual relationship? probably, but i think that to be the least likely of all options. in a similar matter, i have eaten a great variety of foods in my life, and by and large prefer vegetables and non-animal products. i was a vegetarian for fifteen years, by choice. does this make me incapable of eating animal products? for the most part, no. in fact, due to health concerns, i have in the past few years reintroduced fish into my diet. i can choose what i eat (unless i'm highly allergic to it), and i can choose who i fuck. nobody argues about the former; but there seems to be a lot of discussion re: the latter.

in peace, songquake

ps-- thanks for posting! this comm has been pretty quiet for awhile!
(Reply) (Thread)