Gender and Sexuality Are Two Sides of The Same Coin
We need to stop treating issues of gender and sexuality as separate issues, because they're generally not.
Recently I’ve seen some discourse online complaining about how much of a mouthful The Acronym™ has become. You know, the gay one. Admittedly, some variants of The Acronym™ have reached comical proportions, upwards of 14 or more characters long. These additions can sometimes be controversial as well, such as when an extra “A” is appended for (straight) “allies”, or a “K” for kink/BDSM subcultures. As a result, these conversations tend to tie in with conversations about who should be included under the “LGBT” umbrella. Many of the proposed replacements for The Acronym™ are often criticized due to issues related to inclusion. For example, the abbreviation “GSRM” for “Gender, Sexual, and Romantic Minorities” has gained some traction, but is criticized for possibly excluding intersex persons in its definition. The term “queer” — which if you couldn’t tell, is my preferred term — is a singular term that is often used in place of The Acronym™, but it’s derived from a slur that still makes some members of the community uncomfortable.
The problem inherent in this never-ending search for a “proper” label for the queer community is that it is impossible to be both restrictive enough and broad enough in your definitions to encapsulate all individuals who might be labelled as part of the community, and otherwise exclude those who do not fit. There is also widespread disagreement within the community itself regarding the inclusion other identities that are often tied to the queer community, but aren’t considered “intrinsically” queer. For example, the aforementioned inclusion of kink is controversial because while kink is a part of sexual identity, plenty of individuals involved in it are both heterosexual and cisgender and often aren’t subject to the same discrimination that the rest of the community is.
So why do we struggle so much with providing a concrete definition of who is and is not “queer” or “LGBTQ+”? What’s the solution to this identity inclusion crisis?
A Semantic Argument
When the United States Supreme Court originally ruled in favor of a constitutional right to gay marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges, its ruling did not say anything about the intrinsic identities of the people involved. The court found that when you strip the context of an individual’s identity away and view them solely as a citizen of the state, same-sex couples meet all of the same requirements for marriage certification as opposite-sex couples. To deny them access to those rights would be unnecessarily and arbitrarily limiting the rights of one group of citizens in favor of another, which the 14th Amendment specifically outlaws under the Equal Protection clause.
Other legal experts have taken that analysis even further. If a state says that Jane and Jill cannot get married, but would recognize the same marriage if Jane was instead “Jack”, the state is engaging in discrimination based on sex. In other words, if a man can marry a woman, but a woman can’t marry a woman, then women are being denied a state-sanctioned right (in this case, the right to marry a woman) that is provided to men. This is even more explicitly prohibited under the Civil Rights Act and other legislation.
I think that this analysis applies outside of the legal landscape as well. The link between sex discrimination and discrimination based on sexuality or gender identity is more than just a semantic one. The actual psychological and social processes that underlie sexuality and gender discrimination are fundamentally tied to sexism.
Homophobia Is Rooted In Sexism
When most people think of why homophobia exists, they tend to attribute it to two main sources — fundamentalist religious beliefs and cultural norms.
Individuals often claim to be homophobic on religious grounds, stating that their religious beliefs condemn homosexual activity. Plenty of people have already heavily criticized this excuse due to issues related to translation, interpretation, and adherence to religious scripture by those same individuals, but what hasn’t been discussed as intently is the nature of the religious doctrines these people often selectively enforce. These doctrines almost universally relate not to discussions of debauchery and sin, but of traditional gender and family roles. The oft-quoted section of Leviticus in the Torah and the Bible which condemns homosexuality also goes on to explicitly state that women are less valuable than men. Both the Bible and the Qur’an also condemn homosexuality under the pretense that it is “impure”, as it causes one man to submit to another the way God intended for women to.
As fewer people identify with religion, secular homophobia is increasingly common as well, in particular with younger men. Rap, country, and hip hop communities have a long-standing history of dealing with rampant and aggressive homophobia, leading many openly queer artists (like Lil Nas X and Tyler the Creator) to feel ostracized within their own communities. These subcultures are centered around an intense sense of machismo, which positions itself as contrary to the “emasculating” concept of homosexuality, specifically in men.
These communities aren’t isolated, however. The “manosphere” genre of propaganda that has taken over social media platforms like TikTok and Instagram has ushered in a new era of traditional gender norms. Controversial figures like Andrew Tate and trends like “tradwife” content further promote and reinforce a heteronormative worldview while rarely mentioning homosexuality because they presuppose the existence of one male and one female partner in a relationship and dramatically reinforce the gender norms within that relationship. Manosphere influencers like Joe Rogan and Theo Von rarely, if ever, address male homosexuality when talking about “men’s rights”. When they do, it’s usually to parrot conspiracy theories that gay men only exist due to chemicals in the water supply or low testosterone or some other such pseudoscience. One would think that the “male loneliness epidemic”, for example, may in part be due to men feeling unable to form deep emotional relationships with other men for fear of “appearing gay”. But according to the manosphere, the only possible cure for this epidemic is to force women to talk to men more.
There is a notable emphasis and focus on the issue of male homosexuality in all of these cases. When a man “submits” to another man in partnership, they are ceding the traditional role of the man as the central authority within the family, and instead inhabiting the role meant for women. Doing so means that either men are also capable of submission in a relationship, or that partners can share power within a relationship, either of which is a threat to established patriarchal norms. On the other hand, lesbianism and bisexuality are encouraged among women as long as it is for the purpose of gratifying men, due to to the emphasis on women as an object for male sexual gratification.
It is therefore clear that both of the most prominent sources of homophobia actually stem from entrenched sexist beliefs. Both semantically and practically, the issue of homophobia is rooted in expectations for the roles that men and women play in society.
And that is why this next part is so important to understand.
You Cannot Be A Feminist If You’re Anti-Trans
And no, it doesn’t matter if you identify as part of the queer community or not. You can be the gayest queen this side of the Mississippi River, or the most vocal blue-haired radical in the room, and it will still mean nothing if you stop to exclude transgender people from your vision of equality. Because by being someone who wishes to subvert the established patriarchal social order, or by loving someone of the same gender, you are being gender non-conforming.
Being queer is, by itself, an action that falls outside the typical expectations for gender norms. The same discrimination that fuels anti-trans sentiment is used to fuel anti-gay sentiment as well. And those who most frequently suffer under legislation targeting transgender people are often cisgender women. So by supporting such forms of discrimination, you are tacitly supporting sexism (and by extension, homophobia). And to some extent, it seems that American women are actually realizing that, as the disparity in political alignment between men and women in particular grows increasingly wide, especially among younger voters.
But to those who still think that they can be selective in who does and does not get civil, legal, and social protections while protecting their own rights, know this — there can be no freedom for some of us without liberation for all of us.