Per this article if a women willingly pursues a heterosexual lifestyle do they have to give up identifying as a lesbian? Obviously people can self-label however they wish but should she expect other people to go along with her assessment?
I’m a lesbian marrying a man - Friends don’t understand: My sexual orientation never changed. I simply fell in love with a very unexpected person
.
Certainly she can, although she might just be a bisexual in denial. I’ve read before that people can fall in love with a member of a gender they aren’t normally attracted to and then they find that person attractive; the rest of that gender is still uninteresting. It’s just a reverse of the normal path of (find attractive) -> (fall in love) to (fall in love) -> (find attractive); quite a few mental processes can work in reverse like that.
She loves him romantically, has (enjoyable, presumably) sex with the guy, and gets pregnant? Yeah, I’d be hesitant to certify her as 100% lesbian.
Her argument is that her fiancee / husband is the only man to whom she’s attracted seems to be where she hangs her hat, but it just doesn’t seem like it holds water, IMHO. It reminds me of when people say that if you do anything with a member of the same-sex, you’re at least a “little gay.”
Also, I’d love to be at a dinner party when the husband introduces the wife. “I’m really glad we could find a babysitter for the night, so that we could join you. This is my loving wife, E.J. Oh, did I mention she’s a lesbian?” 
She can do whatever she wants. However, my entirely irrelevant take on it was that she seems to see lesbianism as sort of a club, and she wants to retain membership in the club without obeying the bylaws. She wants to keep the social part of lesbianism without the whole “exclusively having sex with other women” part of it.
Depends on the audience. A lot of people have what I would call a “one drop rule” for gay activity, especially in guys. Suck one dick and you’re gay forever. You can try to take the inverse – what if this woman was straight most of her life, but then married another woman while still claiming to be straight? Would people say she’s confused or take her seriously?
That was my read as well.
And obviously there’s a social identity aspect to any subculture, but you can’t get annoyed when people want to stick with the agreed-to meanings of words. If your heterosexual marriage is not one of convenience, being a lesbian pretty much stops being an option.
Call yourself a bisexual feminist if you really need to differentiate yourself from the norm.
Given the number of self-identified lesbians I’ve known who have also, at one point or another, had sex with a man if we make “only have sex with women and never men” the criteria there are actually a lot fewer lesbians than supposed. I gather, however, that a distinction is made between experimentation, one-night stands, and early relationships driven by societal expectations and actual long term committed relationships, the more well known of which is marriage.
The biggest problem here is the hang-up over labels. Frankly, I have no problem with someone stepping outside their normal pattern. A woman who is primarily attracted to women being attracted to a particular man is not someone I’d describe as “heterosexual”.
Yes, technically such a person might be described as bisexual. Of course, there’s still a lot of pressure to being either in the het or the homo camp and not straddling the line so to speak.
Sounds like she’s afraid of calling herself “bisexual” because she thinks people will assume it means she made out with girl once in a nightclub and didn’t throw up afterwards.
Honey, you’re not a lesbian if you’re in love with a man and enjoy having sex with a man and want to have five kids with a man and are married to a man. It ain’t like you had sex with a man once, and now you’re always going to be Antonio the guy-fucker.
If a man regularly had sex with a man, was in love with a man, and married a man, I think we all would roll our eyes if he insisted on being identified as “straight”. Even if he had, in the past regularly had sex with women, and wouldn’t mind having sex with women if he was suddenly single again. He can call himself whatever he likes, that doesn’t mean we have to believe it.
With the women I’ve known, anything that happened before your “coming out” moment-- that click in your head, where you finally got yourself, whether you had yet told anyone else or not-- was free. You could have been married to a man for 20 years and had 4 children; you could have been the minister’s wife, and railed against homosexuality; you could have been a cheerleader who dated the captain of the football team, or even the campus frat party slut in college. Once you came out, though, if you wanted to call yourself a dyke, you had to be exclusively with women. Bisexual women were allowed to hang out in the lesbian community, but they were always eyed with a little suspicion, unless they were very vocal about being “lesbian-identified,” or “political lesbians,” or something. I met one woman who called herself a “lesbian-identified, bisexual celibate.”
IMHO, this woman does sound like a bisexual in denial. You don’t have to be a perfect Kinsey 3 (or 3.5, whatever), to be bisexual. You can be closer to one end of the spectrum or the other, and still be bisexual.
it just takes one to be bi. you could be a 99:1 bi, that’s OK.
I read that article too. I just don’t get it. Call yourself queer and be done with it.
Why would you care? Folks have been relabelling themselves a lot lately and I’ve given up making an effort to care. You are what you say you are.
Into both women and men (or at least one)? Bi. She can call herself anything she wants.
It’s much like married men, who call themselves and think of themselves as straight but regularly hook up with other guys. Its a social identity and what I’d call self-delusion.
My opinion as a queer male doesn’t matter, I don’t think.
By common definition, a lesbian is a woman who only likes women, period. She’s not a lesbian by that definition, but, eh, maybe this is a legitimate edge case.
But the more important bit is that, in my experience, identifying as a lesbian is more about being part of and having access to that community. If other lesbians accept her, then she’s fine calling herself a lesbian. If they don’t, then she needs to find a new identifier.
Changing IDs is difficult. I’ve vaccilated between straight and bi and considered gay over the years, but decided to throw my hands up and stick with queer several years ago.
Exactly.
I consider myself to be a semi-opaque splotch of paint and I don’t care what everyone says. I’ve known it since I was little. Even though I have a job and drive a car, I still think of myself as “splotchy”.
whatever you say Rorschach.
She can call herself whatever she wants, but the word everyone else uses for what she is is “bisexual”. Maybe she’s a bisexual who’s closer to the lesbian end of the spectrum, but she’s bi. I’m not sure why she objects to this term.
She’s just a woman who loves women, who discovered her egg-centricities.
*How do you afford your heterosexual lifestyle?
How do you afford your heterosexual lifestyle?
How do you afford your heterosexual lifestyle?
Ah, tell me. *
– with apologies to Cake
She’s the one who wrote an entire article on the subject in a popular online magazine. It’s not like astro is irked with his dog walker for insisting she’s still a lesbian. I wouldn’t fault anyone for not bothering to read her article or open astro’s thread, but if you cared enough to, why not have an opinion on it?
Personally I just find it irritating when people are obstinate enough to insist on applying a label to themselves that means the opposite of who they actually are.
It reminds me of the joke about the woman says she’d have sex with someone for a million dollars, but gets upset about being thought a whore when offered $5. And the punchline is something like, we’ve already established that you’re a whore, we’re just haggling over price.
The idea that the woman is a lesbian who could be with any number of women but plans to spend the rest of her life with the one man in the world she could love seems patently silly. It’s great she found someone but if she found him lovable it’s pretty clear to me there are other men she would love.