27 04 2011

As a kid, I thought boys liked girls and girls liked boys.  By the time I was 7, I knew that some men were evil and liked other men and that some women were confused and thought they loved other women.  By 12, I was questioning the evil and confused parts and also knew that some people were really off their rockers and wanted to date both men and women.  Obviously, the musings of a child are a bit simplified. But there’s a part of me that longs to return to those days.

I first came out to my best friend at 18 and began learning everything I could about gay people…through the internet, of course, as I was too scared to actually talk to other gay people. I thought I was done learning new terms after drag queen and trangender, but I’ve recently learned several new labels from the world-o-homos.  The first was:

“Asexuality: (sometimes referred to as nonsexuality), in its broadest sense, is the lack of sexual attraction and/or the lack of interest in and desire for sex.”

I’m an open-minded, science-y guy; I can put 2 & 2 together.  I guess I find the idea of no sexual attraction to anyone a bit weird, but it’s not for me to judge other people.  If you feel no sexual attraction, I guess that’s no more “abnormal” than my own attractions to other men.

Not too long after that, I started hearing other words like:

“Pansexuality: (also referred to as omnisexuality, gender-blind) a term referring to the feeling that one has the potential for sexual attractions, sexual desire, or romantic love, towards people of all gender identities and biological sexes; Gender and sex are insignificant or irrelevant in determining whether they will be sexually attracted to others. The concept of pansexuality deliberately rejects the idea that there are only two genders, as pansexual people are open to relationships with people who do not identify as strictly men or women.”

I can get behind that.  It’s not for me, as I like my men to be men, but again with the open-minded thing.  There is something interesting about gender-bending and androgyny, even if I don’t find it sexually appealing.

But then I heard:

     “Cisgenered: an adjective used in the context of gender issues and counselling to refer to a class of gender identities formed by a match between an individual’s gender identity and the behavior or role considered appropriate for one’s sex.”

The first time I heard it, I had to look it up.  I read the definition and was a bit confused.  I finally realized that it means “a man who is identifies as a man.” Alrighty…that’s pretty normal…so, why do we need a label for that?  But, whatever.  If it makes people happy.

But the more I thought about it, the more it bugged me.  I understand the reason that LGBT was originally lumped together: strength in numbers.  When there were so few people willing to be vocal and stand up for equal rights, every voice was desperately needed to get anything accomplished.  As far as that is concerned, I don’t see any reason to break that up, even if the “T” was a later addition.  It’s been around for quite a while now. I’ve heard people argue against this, saying that gay, lesbian, and trans culture are all so different, they can’t possibly be lumped into the same category.  I understand this reasoning for certain topics, but when it comes to things like equal rights, banding together is the best thing for everyone. I can even get behind the addition for the “Q,” as a way of including all the other groups of people, but that’s where I draw the line.

Why are people starting to write themselves into boxes by creating new labels? Isn’t that something that the gay community has fought against for decades? I don’t know why people feel the need to label themselves as a “cisgender pansexual” or an “androgynous panromantic lesbian.” It just feels like it’s reaching.

A quick google search of “LGBTQ,” with the google-suggested addition of “IA,” brought me to a link that had 51 Queer terms, only 7 of which I found even remotely informative.  And that might be reaching.  The rest of them sounded like regurgitations of the same term over and over and over.  It just doesn’t make any sense.  You’re never going to be able to label every single personality quirk or niche sexual interest of every single person in the world.  Just stop.  

I know it’s not PC to not give every wittle special snowfwake their own very special wittle trophy, but come on.  Grow up.  I, for one, don’t want or need to fit every aspect of a label.  If I had to break it down, I guess it could be said that I’m a cisgender homosexual  with asexual heterosexual attractions…except it makes me sound like a pretentious jackass.  I’m a gay man.  I don’t feel the need to explain every intimate detail of my sexual likes and dislikes to someone the moment I meet them, nor so I need a label to do so.




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: