Vanity Fair

[amykouai]

So this whole Queer By Choice thing bothers me, and I have been thinking on precisely why and I think I've hit upon it.

The first is, a lot of people in the Queer By Choice movement seem to go to some effort to undermine the general queer experience of people who aren't in such a movement, i.e. the people who believe that they're not Queer By

Comments

[centauress]

I thought Queer-by-Choice was about people who have one sexual preference being more open minded than would be their default by nature... IE, I know I like girls, but that doesn't mean I won't try boys.

Or is there some other insidiousness that you've glimpsed and I've been oblivious too? I'm only going on a teeny-bopper's say-so here.

[amykouai]

My understanding from Queer By Choice people is that the name is to be taken at face value, and in fact the website actually talks about how they are unfairly attributed with the "not a choice" appellation and are resentful about it.

[ardonis]

I agree. It's a problem I have with self-righteous people in general, such as vegans. And it's irritating. I have no problem with what you do, with what you believe; it's when you start telling me that I'm wrong for eating meat that I get offended. But at the same time, maybe the Queer By Choice movement sort of requires that it be true for everyone; maybe that sort of universalism is inherent to its beliefs. I don't know much about it at all, so I'm just throwing out an idea.

Also, I think that "Liberality for All" is actually very good. Hilarious, sure, but I think it makes a good point: it's always the majority that suppresses the minority. If our government were totally liberal today, I'm pretty sure that we'd still have to worry about our rights and freedoms being infringed. Hence why I'm glad the 2nd Amendment exists: the government may one day decide that the 1st amendment is very limited, and I want to be able to fight against that if the time comes.