They act offended because it's now supposed to be orientation, implying there is no choice. Yet I feel like the mental gymnastics they need to go through to keep the gender spectrum as something they can choose to be would argue against an orientation not simply being a preference.
Comments (2)
sorted by:
I heard Michael Knowles say today that preference is the perfect word to use. He said he has had a preference for Chocolate chip cookies over oatmeal raisin cookies since he was a kid. He didn’t choose that preference, he just naturally preferred it that way. If we think about it you can say that for lots of things we prefer, it’s not a choice. So basically being illiterate she decided to change the definition.
I don't understand this thinking at all. The "orientation" narrative seems to be "gosh, it might seem awful, but they just can't help themselves".
Personally, I'm fine with homosexuality, gay marriage, etc. And I couldn't care less whether it's a personal preference or an immutable preference (i.e., orientation).
To say that gays can only be gay if they were born that way seems incredibly condescending. And more than a little bizarre. Are they saying that I (straight) am not allowed to go out and have gay sex if I feel like it? What's the thinking?