Oops

[frayadjacent]

I tried to argue to my coworkers at lunch today that one need not invoke a genetic cause of "homosexuality" (their word) in order for it to be morally OK. It's also morally fine if it is a choice! I'm pretty sure they think I'm a homophobe now.

(I suppose this would have been as good a time as any to come out at work, but given that I'm still somewhat dazed at having participated in a multi-minute conversation with my coworkers at all, it's not surprising I didn't.)

Comments

[lilacsigil]

Oh dear. I've also been surprised at the rise of the "born this way" argument, as if being gay wouldn't be okay otherwise! I suspect it was a political argument designed to gain sympathy from people who feel a bit icky about gay people but don't actually hate us, and it really took off.

[frayadjacent]

Yeah, it strikes me as an attempt at a pragmatic argument that actually cedes ground to homophobes.

[luzula]

That's a weird argument to me, because something being genetically based has nothing to do with morality. I mean, if there were a genetically based tendency to be violent, or greedy, or whatever, that wouldn't make it okay.

Of course, one could go all meta and say that our sense of morality is partly shaped by our genetic make-up, so that morality and genetics do have something to do with each other. But I'd say it's still true that we have behaviors that are partly genetically determined that we morally disapprove of.

(Just so nobody misunderstands: I think gayness is just fine whether inborn or chosen.)

So your co-workers are not very talkative?

[frayadjacent]

I mean, if there were a genetically based tendency to be violent, or greedy, or whatever, that wouldn't make it okay.

Totally!

[sanguinity]

Yeah, in my experience, "Your conclusions correct but your reasons are wrong," are easily misunderstood, and arguments about the necessity or sufficiency of a premise (or lack thereof) are even worse. In a lot of cases, people get confused about what argument you're making, so assume that you're attacking the conclusion in some roundabout, easily-deniable way. And then when you deny it, they assume they just got their confirmation of your motives. :-/

For myself, I dislike the 'born that way' argument in part because it's not so great at supporting bi people: we do have, to some extent, the liberty to choose a societally approved partner and still have a shot at happiness.

Mostly, though, all the "they didn't have a choice" arguments suck, no matter who you're making them about. There is always the implication that who-all shouldn't be that way, and there is always the implication that 'we' are in a superior position, magnanimously overlooking some deep flaw in who-all. Not to mention that it encourages "well, you didn't try hard enough" arguments (which are prevalent where disability is concerned, f'rex).

FWIW, I'm not sure that we-the-queer-community were the originators of the "born that way" argument: when I was younger, I got the "but what causes it??" question a lot, usually from people who were trying to work out in their heads what their own ethical stance was. Faced with that, there was a strong temptation to say, "Well, I don't know what causes it, but it's not a choice," because that was so obviously the answer that would have the strongest and quickest effect on person-in-front-of-you.

[frayadjacent]

As usual you say very smart and sensible things. And I totally agree about the superiority/magnanimity thing. It was very much there and I've seen it a lot before too. (Though I kinda doubt I was the only queer person in the conversation; I was definitely getting a vibe from one person in particular that this convo was *personal*.)

there was a strong temptation to say, "Well, I don't know what causes it, but it's not a choice," because that was so obviously the answer that would have the strongest and quickest effect on person-in-front-of-you.

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense!

Part of the difficulty I had expressing myself was also that I was trying to acknowledge that plenty of people do feel that they were "born this way" -- and that that's fine, I don't get to decide who they are, they do. But that's a different thing from the moral argument, or the endless fascination with "what causes it?"