Quinto is out of the closet

[Sci]

I never got the whole bisexual thing.

*shrugs* As a heterosexual male, I don't "get" homosexuality. I literally cannot imagine being sexually attracted to another man; it's just not something I experience.

That's okay. I'm sure a gay man may really imagine being attracted to a woman; it just may not something he experiences.

We don't have to "get" one-another's sexual orientation in order to accept them as real and legitimate states of being. We can all just accept one-another as different yet equal.

Just pick a sex organ you want to play with and be done with it.

Like it or not, bisexuals are attracted to both sexes. It's not a choice, it's just who they are. Why pressure them to conform to other people's paradigms instead of letting them be themselves?

It's like the lady says: "Baby, I was born this way."

Not always and not exclusively.

People do not pick their sexual orientation.

Well, this is getting into the question of Essentialism vs. Constructionism. Is a sexual orientation a natural state, or is it a social construction? Etc.

And ultimately what that boils down to is that there are a lot of degrees and shades of grey. There are people who identify as straight but occasionally are attracted to/have sexual affairs with people of their own sex, and vice versa. Human sexuality is often a spectrum more than a clear division. I just made an essentialist argument earlier, because I do think that most bisexuals -- who face discrimination from both straights and gays -- are Born That Way. But I also think that's probably a bit of an oversimplification; there are bisexuals who are more attracted to the same sex, or more attracted to the opposite, even as they are attracted to both strongly and persistently.

The bottom line is: We shouldn't be pressuring people to fit into neat little boxes. So long as no one is violating anyone's rights, we should just let people be themselves, to find or construct the "box" that accurately reflects their own inner nature, that reflects that they were "Born This Way." And we shouldn't be discriminating on that basis.

 

[sonak]

Not always and not exclusively.

People do not pick their sexual orientation.

why is this such an important and rigid claim?

what would it matter if you did pick it? Are rights tied to whether identity is outside one's control?

Does that mean discrimination against Catholics is OK because being Catholic is a choice and hey you can always convert to Protestantism if you're sick of discrimination?(I know you don't really think this, just using an analogy here)


Bottom line: people should be who they want to be, whether that's their orientation or their preference, and to the extent that their choices and behaviors do not affect others, let them be and don't discriminate.


(edited: Sci said some of this above. oh well)

 

[Sci]

Not always and not exclusively.

People do not pick their sexual orientation.

why is this such an important and rigid claim?

what would it matter if you did pick it? Are rights tied to whether identity is outside one's control?

Does that mean discrimination against Catholics is OK because being Catholic is a choice and hey you can always convert to Protestantism if you're sick of discrimination?(I know you don't really think this, just using an analogy here)


Bottom line: people should be who they want to be, whether that's their orientation or their preference, and to the extent that their choices and behaviors do not affect others, let them be and don't discriminate.


(edited: Sci said some of this above. oh well)

Ultimately, I would argue that both the Essentialist ("sexual orientation is not a choice, it is something you are born with") and Constructionist ("sexual orientation is a social construct") views are true, to an extent, and that it's often going to vary from person to person. Some people are just flat-out, 100%, didn't-choose-it gay, some people are just flat-out, 100%, didn't-choose-it straight, some people are just flat-out, 100%, didn't-choose-it bisexual, and some people are somewhere in between it all but choose to adopt one orientation or another for various reasons.

ETA:

To give an example of one of the latter, one of my closest friends is a man who self-identified as straight though that is not 100% accurate. As he put its it, "Well, I'm 97.5% straight and 2.5% gay." What he means by that is that the overwhelming majority of the time, he is attracted to women, but that on some occasions, he has found himself attracted to men. He does not feel that he is attracted to men often enough, nor with sufficient intensity, to really consider himself bisexual, and he is certainly attracted to women, and strongly so, too often to be considered gay -- but, clearly he's not purely straight, either. He's somewhere in the middle, but self-identifies as heterosexual because this is the closest to reality.

 

[sonak]

People do not pick their sexual orientation.

why is this such an important and rigid claim?

what would it matter if you did pick it? Are rights tied to whether identity is outside one's control?

Does that mean discrimination against Catholics is OK because being Catholic is a choice and hey you can always convert to Protestantism if you're sick of discrimination?(I know you don't really think this, just using an analogy here)


Bottom line: people should be who they want to be, whether that's their orientation or their preference, and to the extent that their choices and behaviors do not affect others, let them be and don't discriminate.


(edited: Sci said some of this above. oh well)

Ultimately, I would argue that both the Essentialist ("sexual orientation is not a choice, it is something you are born with") and Constructionist ("sexual orientation is a social construct") views are true, to an extent, and that it's often going to vary from person to person. Some people are just flat-out, 100%, didn't-choose-it gay, some people are just flat-out, 100%, didn't-choose-it straight, some people are just flat-out, 100%, didn't-choose-it bisexual, and some people are somewhere in between it all but choose to adopt one orientation or another for various reasons.

I agree, I just meant that whether it's an orientation or a freely chosen preference shouldn't matter from the perspective of discrimination.

 

[Sci]

Ultimately, I would argue that both the Essentialist ("sexual orientation is not a choice, it is something you are born with") and Constructionist ("sexual orientation is a social construct") views are true, to an extent, and that it's often going to vary from person to person. Some people are just flat-out, 100%, didn't-choose-it gay, some people are just flat-out, 100%, didn't-choose-it straight, some people are just flat-out, 100%, didn't-choose-it bisexual, and some people are somewhere in between it all but choose to adopt one orientation or another for various reasons.

I agree, I just meant that whether it's an orientation or a freely chosen preference shouldn't matter from the perspective of discrimination.

I agree, but part of the intellectual foundation for much of the modern LGBT rights movement's support amongst heterosexuals is the argument that it is immoral to penalize someone for something they have not chosen. A heterosexual might be uncomfortable with the idea of homosexuality (perhaps finding it physically repulsive because it is not their natural orientation) and therefore inclined to think it somehow bad, or okay to discriminate on the basis of, if they view it as a choice (a choice which, after all, provokes a negative emotional reaction in them). But if that heterosexual can be persuaded to believe that it is not a choice on any level whatsoever, then that heterosexual may make the analogy to discrimination against people on the basis of other unchosen traits -- height, for instance, or skin color -- and therefore view such discrimination as being unfair and unjust.

That's why many people tend to want to promote the Essentialist argument and ignore the Constructionist argument: Because it's just true enough that it's not a lie (there are people who were just born that way and it's in no way a choice or a shade of grey), and it undermines negative feelings against homosexual behavior a heterosexual may experience.

 

[Pauln6]

I suppose the labels are just that really but sexual orientation is indeed a spectrum. There are indeed some people who are attracted to both sexes but who choose to have relationships with only one, perhaps because they are more attracted to that one sex. They might label themselves as straight or gay when technically they are 'biologically' bisexual. I'm largely in favour of monogamy so I suppose at some stage you have to pick a side but I'm not really in favour of people being socially pressured into picking one side over another.

 

[Sci]

I suppose the labels are just that really but sexual orientation is indeed a spectrum. There are indeed some people who are attracted to both sexes but who choose to have relationships with only one, perhaps because they are more attracted to that one sex. They might label themselves as straight or gay when technically they are 'biologically' bisexual.

That's true, but part of acknowledging that human sexuality falls on a spectrum is acknowledging that not every individual's orientation falls in that spectrum's middle. Just as there are plenty of people who may be biologically bisexual but social hetero- or homosexual because of behavioral choices, there are plenty of people who are just plain gay or just plain straight, who are just at the extreme end of the spectrum with no choice involved.

In other words:

People are different.

 

[number6]

Not always and not exclusively.

People do not pick their sexual orientation.

Never said they did. But Bi isn't considered gay, even by the gay community. Usually it is all about exploration and experimentation, versus some kind of internal wiring.
Regardless, I respect what Quinto has done, but there is no sacred ground being broken here as you seem to continue to insist.

 

[Aeolusdallas]

Not always and not exclusively.

People do not pick their sexual orientation.

Never said they did. But Bi isn't considered gay, even by the gay community. Usually it is all about exploration and experimentation, versus some kind of internal wiring.
Regardless, I respect what Quinto has done, but there is no sacred ground being broken here as you seem to continue to insist.

Some people like both guys and girls. So they are not gay or straight. Saying they are just experimentation is kind of insulting towards bisexuals.

 

[number6]

How? That is usually the case, at least with most I know. The only one taking offense is you and you certainly don't speak for the gay/lesbian/bi community. You're not going to "school" me on this as you quite obviously have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[Aeolusdallas]

How? That is usually the case, at least with most I know. The only one taking offense is you and you certainly don't speak for the gay/lesbian/bi community. You're not going to "school" me on this as you quite obviously have no idea what you're talking about.

That's BS. Saying bisexuals are just experimenting is completely insulting. It's like saying Lesbians just need a man or Gay guys are gay because they have a controlling mother. I am Gay and I have had more than one Bisexual roommate. When ever that "they are just experimenting" thing was used on them they always took offense.
You are the one who is reducing their love lives to a fad.

 

[number6]

Oh stop hyperventilating. I said nothing of the kind.

 

[Aeolusdallas]

Oh stop hyperventilating. I said nothing of the kind.

Why yes,

Never said they did. But Bi isn't considered gay, even by the gay community. Usually it is all about exploration and experimentation, versus some kind of internal wiring.

yes you did

 

[KeepOnTrekking]

I'm happy that Mr. Quinto felt moved to decide to come out. Everybody has their reasons for the choices they make and it sounds like he came to a turning point in his life to help build a bridge of connection to those less fortunate when it comes to finding acceptance in their lives. Zachary is a welcome light in a sometimes dark and judging world. To thine own self be true and infinite diversity will start appearing in infinite combinations.

 

[number6]

Oh stop hyperventilating. I said nothing of the kind.

Why yes,

Never said they did. But Bi isn't considered gay, even by the gay community. Usually it is all about exploration and experimentation, versus some kind of internal wiring.

yes you did

Then be offended. You seem to do that quite well. It doesn't mean you know what you're talking about.

 

[Aeolusdallas]

Oh stop hyperventilating. I said nothing of the kind.

Why yes,

Never said they did. But Bi isn't considered gay, even by the gay community. Usually it is all about exploration and experimentation, versus some kind of internal wiring.

yes you did

Then be offended. You seem to do that quite well. It doesn't mean you know what you're talking about.

Actually I do. You said Bisexuals are just experimenting. It's plain as day.

 

[number6]

I said experimentation and exploring. Most Bi folk I know wind up picking on eventually when the novelty wears off. You started this whole thing claiming that Quinto is an A-lister who took a huge risk by coming out which is completely naïve, especially in 2011.

 

[Aeolusdallas]

I said experimentation and exploring. Most Bi folk I know wind up picking on eventually when the novelty wears off. You started this whole thing claiming that Quinto is an A-lister who took a huge risk by coming out which is completely naïve, especially in 2011.

It was a huge risk. Even in this day and age. Only a fool would not understand that and Quinto is the closest to A-List young actor who has ever come out.

 

[number6]

I said experimentation and exploring. Most Bi folk I know wind up picking on eventually when the novelty wears off. You started this whole thing claiming that Quinto is an A-lister who took a huge risk by coming out which is completely naïve, especially in 2011.

It was a huge risk. Even in this day and age. Only a fool would not understand that and Quinto is the closest to A-List young actor who has ever come out.

Not by a long shot.

 

[Sci]

I said experimentation and exploring. Most Bi folk I know wind up picking on eventually when the novelty wears off. You started this whole thing claiming that Quinto is an A-lister who took a huge risk by coming out which is completely naïve, especially in 2011.

It was a huge risk. Even in this day and age. Only a fool would not understand that and Quinto is the closest to A-List young actor who has ever come out.

Not by a long shot.

All I know is, I'm seeing way more mainstream media attention to Quinto's coming out than for almost any other young leading male actor I've ever seen.