I think Wyrzen might have been making a distinction between sexual preference and sexual lifestyle. I mean, how you live your life (which is what I would consider to be your lifestyle) IS a choice. No, really, it is. As a straight male, I could still pretend to be gay. I can still live my life as if I actually were homosexual. Furthermore, I could be choose to be celibate, and thus forgo the heterosexual lifestyle in another manner.
There are plenty of homosexual people out there who live a heterosexual lifestyle, due to societal pressures and whatnot. They are still homosexual, I fully understand that orientation is not a choice.
This, I think, really captures why so many of us in the LGBT community find the phrase "homosexual lifestyle" offensive, or at least mildly annoying. First off, there's no such
thing as a homosexual lifestyle. There just isn't. What would that even be? Liking fashion, knitting and make-up? Does that make liking baseball and math part of the opposite heterosexual lifestyle?
Second, homosexual lifestyle seems to reduce our personality to one single trait that deviates from the societal norm. Even though I doubt that's what you mean, the phrase implies that all my hobbies, interests and aspirations are defined by who I prefer to have sex with. Again, this is not the case.
Simply put, we live our lives based on choices that result from
all aspects of our identity. I'm currently pursuing a degree in economics (not an interior designer). I like math, science and history, and I abhor fashion. Not because I'm changing my lifestyle based on societal pressures, but because I think fashion is boring while the others aren't.
To put it in perspective, I'll use another example:
Craig is black. He's currently enrolled in the engineering program at UCLA. He plays basketball, but he much prefers soccer. He also hates rap, and listens to alternative rock and classical instead. Why is he this way? Is it because he's rejecting the black lifestyle due to societal pressure, and choosing to embrace the white lifestyle instead? Or is it because he's a unique individual with his own interests and lifestyle choices not based solely on his race?
What do you think?
To clarify, I know it might sound like I'm attacking you. I'm not. Or if I am, I don't mean to and I apologize in advance. These issues just get to me because they propagate stereotypes that greatly color my life.
That being said, those of LGBT orientation are normal people and should be treated as such, which also means that they should not be immune to criticism just because they're oppressed. Too often I see minorities (racial, sexual, etc.) use the term "rivilege" to describe the majority, as with the article I linked. It's baseless vitriol.
Could you elaborate here? Are you saying that the
article is baseless vitriol (because it is), or that the concept of privilege is baseless vitriol (because it's very much not)?