1000 different shades

I never considered writing about being bisexual here. After all, what does it have to do with anything? Sure, I heard David Cameron say that gay marriage is:

“an important step forward, that strengthens society”

but I must confess I thought: “Who wants to get married anyway?” Then I inadvertently  clicked on “viewpoints, gay marriage” and found this piece of wisdom from the Church of England:

“Gay couples can be excellent parents but it’s not the same as having the biological inheritance of both parents passed on to the child.”

I used to think that the C of E was the thinking person’s catholicism, but now I have doubts. Has Malcolm Brown done a scientific study to see if the quality of parenting is really different? Does he know a lot of gay parents? He claims the church does not see gay people as a threat, but I sure think Malcolm does. Like many, he seems to think that marriage has to be protected from the influence of gay people. Is he at all familiar with Dalrymple observing that:

“British children are much likelier to have a television in their bedroom than a father living at home.”

It looks like marriage was going downhill long before gay people got in on it. I could paint some awful pictures of traditional family life going horribly wrong, but I’m sure we’ve all seen plenty of those already.

By Jutka Kovacs who gave me permission to publish her work (Jutka Kovacs) [GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html) or CC-BY-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0)]

By Jutka Kovacs who gave me permission to publish her work (Jutka Kovacs) [GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html) or CC-BY-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0)%5D

Luckily, there’s a completely different way to go on with this story. One evening I came across American artist iO Tillett Wright on TED. You should really see “50 shades of gay”, but basically, she:

“decided to photograph anyone in this country that was not 100 percent straight, which, if you don’t know, is a limitless number of people.”

Later on she asked the people participating to quantify exactly how gay they were, because if we want to discriminate against gay people, we have to draw the line somewhere. Many people did not know how to answer that question. According to iO:

“they had never been presented with the option before.”

She found a 1000 different shades of gay! As my psychology textbook describes it: If you say people are gay or lesbian when they’ve ever had a homosexual experience, that would be 20% of us.


If you just look at the people who were lucky (I hope!) to have had such an experience in the past year, 1 to 3% of us would be out of a job, (if they happened to be a teacher at a certain Dutch faith-based school).

“When exactly do you become a second class citizen?”

That is iO’s final question. And mine.

About Pipteinpteron

Catch a falling feather. Don't keep it.
This entry was posted in atheism, LBGT issues and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to 1000 different shades

  1. duncommutin says:

    I thoroughly agree with your analysis of gay marriage vs conventional marriage.
    In the recent debate in the UK, the argument against gay marriage that I found the most preposterous was this: “Parliament doesn’t have the right to change an institution which has existed for thousands of years.”. So of course, parliament never had the right to abolish capital punishment, slavery.. where do we stop? It was obviously a mistake to move out of the dark ages.

  2. According to some, it definitely is! Thank you for your comment, duncommutin.

  3. Argus says:

    Gay, duckie, homo, queer or whatever … nothing much is evil but thinking makes it so. Earlier generations’ GDHQs were considered ‘bad’ and fair game for beating up (unless accepted as if they were actually women).
    Today GDHQs are becoming accepted into the mainstream once more. I say once more, because it’s all a fashion thing really—in ancient Greece for example bed partners were interchangeable and no-one batted an eyelid. In fact homosexuality was actively encouraged in the phalanx, men would fight all the more fiercely if they perceived the lover in danger.

    Without being one I’ve known GDHQs as good friends, and some of them very intelligent people—for myself I accept people as I find them and if I find them sharing most of my values it matters not a whit their sexual orientation.

    Sadly I’m not above slinging mud at a blanket when I perceive an advantage: for instance have you ever wondered why the Pope and his minions wear those dresses? Could it be for speed of access when alone with the Swish Guards?

    • Thank you for your comment. I’ve read Will Storr’s book the Heretics and he describes a discussion with Mackay, who spends his life fighting evolution, and a fellow preacher. This guy says:

      “Homosexuals will get into a position where they’ll start to impose their values.”
      “We’ll be forced to be gay by gays?” Will Storr asks.
      “Yes,” he replies. “That’s where it will go.”

      Before I read this, I saw a lot of preachers who protested too much when it came to gays. After shouting gay people would go to hell they went on the internet for their daily dose of the forbidden thing. But now I think there are two groups. The ones who have problems with their own inclinations and the ones who have managed to convince themselves that we are a threat to them.

  4. Argus says:

    Damn. Now I’ve lowered the tone of the establishment. I do that a lot … bad dog!

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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