Skip to comments.Oh no, she said she chose to be gay
Posted on 01/24/2012 12:27:38 PM PST by Mustang Driver
Cynthia Nixon of Sex In The City fame (I finally got to see it on E years after its run on HBO; what a loathsome show about some lonely, superficial people) is gay. She said it was a choice a statement that has angered certain people who want to stifle her free speech and dictate how she feels.
First the over-reaction from John Aravosis:
Its not a choice, unless you consider my opting to date a guy with brown hair versus a guy with blonde hair a choice, he writes. Its only a choice among flavors I already like every religious right hatemonger is now going to quote this woman every single time they want to deny us our civil rights.
I really do not know what sort of supernatural powers God gave John Aravosis to peer into Miss Nixons soul.
So what did she say?
From the New York Times:
I gave a speech recently, an empowerment speech to a gay audience, and it included the line Ive been straight and Ive been gay, and gay is better. And they tried to get me to change it, because they said it implies that homosexuality can be a choice. And for me, it is a choice.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.dailymail.com ...
She probably made her “choice” after she realized she couldn’t attract any men.
munch that carpet, Cindy!
No one gives a rat's *ss what 'flavor' you like.
I believe that being gay is a choice. At least for women.
She had a husband and children.
The weirdest “choice” she made was to hook up with the World’s ugliest “woman”. But all actors are crazy.
Gays used to routinely refer to it as being a lifestyle CHOICE. That was before they figured out it was an advantage for being gay not be a choice.
She said that FOR HER PERSONALLY, it was a choice. She was very careful NOT to say it was a choice for EVERYONE.
Stupid reactions by the ultra-PC crowd. If she had said “I just KNOW that it’s ALSO a choice for EVERYONE ELSE,” then I could at least see some basis for snarking at her. But she was only speaking for herself.
Isn't that a law in physics? Nasties attract Nasties....
Thing is many male homosexuals the look and mannerisms that would lead you to believe it is in the genes but then there are very non effeminate types that confuse the issue
The reason they hate the idea that it is a behavioral choice is that this reality puts the onus (that’s with an o) of their sexual preferences on themselves instead of removing the “blame” to being “born that way”, ie, blaming God.
The unconscious thought process is “if God made me this way, there’s no way He’ll hold me accountable, but if it’s a choice, and I viscerally know that it’s wrong, I know I will be judged for my choices.”
Dating a lesbian that looks like a male is like wanting a hotdog but only getting the bun.
Well whether it is a choice or not Homosexual marriage adoption are wrong PERIOD
The key word there, “had.”
I believe homosexuals are born that way, just like all sinners. We are all born into sin of some type or another but that truth isn't the ticket punch to God's forgivness.
I’d need to see the DNA to figure out what is going on in that photo.
Now that is HILARIOUS!
She left him. He didn’t leave her.
Since the two of them look vaguely similar, I'm guessing there was some kind of wicked Uncle Ernie in her childhood.
"Any recent lead actor/actress who has been in a hot series for four years or more is set for life. He never has to work again. His children will never have to work. They are free to do and be what they want, despite the cost, despite the controversy."
I think they make a lovely couple, can we assume the one with the tie wears the snap-on tools?
If having SSAD (same sex attraction disorder) were a defect in human DNA it would be safe to say it would have been bred out of the genetic code in a few generations as up until doctors started playing with artificial means, the SSAD crowd could not reproduce.
Even if a case could be made that they “feel” this way SO WHAT? There are many feelings we as civilized humans just do not act upon unless we are part of the liberal “if it feels good do it” movement.
When I see a car that I would really like, if I used the SSAD mentality it should be OK to just steal it.
Or how about if I spot a hot chick that I would like to do the nasty with, according to the SSAD crowd I should just do a Denny Crane and throw her down on the floor and do her!
The two sides on the issue are lesbians say it is a choice, the males say that it is genetic.
During the 90s the argument between the two homosexual factions was pretty open.
Ok, I’ll bite...what is meant by “choice” in that observation? I have no idea what your comment meant.
I just bet their momma’s are so proud....
Obama has the proud distinction of being a "bi-bi"...
A bi-racial bi-sexual.
This is a Class 5 Mullet Violation if I ever saw one.
I don’t wish gay on anyone, and I believe the reason why there’s an argument in the first place is that the gay lobby crushes any attempt at medical scientific inquiry on the topic.
This is the first place I go in any argument about gay rights -
“What causes it? You want me to get behind it as normative. I know that at the very least you have a reproductive disorder probably along the same lines as post-partum depression, in that you can’t conceive normally through any other means but adoption. As such, aren’t you even curious WHY you don’t feel like you had a choice?”
To go further, now you want me to afford legal rights to you in your relationship, and in the benefits it is going to afford the rest of society. The only justification you offer is that of ‘equality’, when clearly there’s nothing equal about this sort of family structure at all.
Is it reasonable for us, prior to doing such a thing, to ask for some research first? Isn’t this the reason why we nearly wrecked our economy to stop global warming too? We nearly placed massive limits on individual civil liberties on the basis of very poor research and a massive amount of emotional outpouring of support.
I think this approach does a couple of things. First, it doesn’t bring ideology into it in the least. This means that I’m not intimating that a gay person is either wrong, or that their condition was a choice. I know enough gay people to know that many do not feel they had one any more than many pedophiles do, for example.
Second, if we don’t know what causes it, we don’t know that there may not be a cure, and whether they think they need one or not, they should at least offer other gay people the choice of being cured or not before we go tearing up 6000 years of social fabric first.
The bigotry of the Liberal mind never fails to show its ugly face, even when addressing the personal beliefs of someone who is nominally “on their side”.
The dominant media treatment of Nixon is likely to be no different than their treatment of black Conservatives - they feel betrayed.
But the only thing being betrayed is the belief-myths in their own mind - that everything is as they believe it to be, when the reality is not as they believe.
Exactly, if you’re “born that way” with a propensity to steal, covet, lust, murder, blaspheme, idolize, etc...
you’re still held accountable for each violation,
unless you have Someone that can pay for those sins for you.
Of course it’s a choice.
We called ‘em LUGs.
I wouldn’t say it’s a choice in the way that there is a singular moment in time when somebody considers the options and makes a decision to be straight or gay. But I do think it is a learned response over time after a myriad little micro-decisions and experiences. In my estimation it’s a fetish, arrived at in the way that any other fetish occurs to somebody. I also think it evolves over time just like fetishes do. Are people “born” to be interested in BDSM? or feet? or whatever? I don’t think so. I think it is learned and I think it is constantly changing. Some people do “evolve” back out of it again. Some just keep diving deeper in.
Like most of us, I’ve known a large number of gay men and women over the years and I have yet to meet one that didn’t have some sexual trauma in their formative years. Whether abuse or a dysfunctional relationship of some kind, without fail it always seems to be there.
The really inexplicable thing to me about gay relationships,— at least the ones I’ve seen— is the almost universal tendency for same-sex couples to still settle into a masculine and feminine role. Every time. Some guy who claims to be attracted to another man— to the exclusion of women— is attracted to an effeminate man. Or a woman who eschews men but is attracted to a “butch” or masculine woman. Here is somebody that is in fact still attracted to the opposite sex, but only their own artificial fantasy version. She wants a woman that acts like a man and straps on equipment to simulate being a man... you have to wonder if that person is really gay at all. She’s attracted to maleness, not feminitity. Just as some “gay” men are attracted to men that present themselves as feminine. I suspect there’s a fear underlying it. They’re still actually attracted to the opposite sex but there is some deep-seated fear of the biologically authentic gender.
I want to see the ORIGINAL parts list.
in 2003, Nixon ended her relationship with Danny Mozes, the father of her two children, Samantha and Charles. The couple had met in high school, and theyd never married. Then she got involved with Christine Marinoni, a Park Slope institution and a public-school advocate (although Nixon tells me Marinoni has since switched to union organizing).
Both are real woofers. (Its a man, baby) X 2.
oh good grief!
The other person looks like a man to me.
I'm guessing the blond is the lipstick version and the angry one is the dipstick version.
Them two are a roadhouse bartender's worst nightmare.
I'm not sure they're human....