The New Lesbians Are Actually Heterosexual - Good To Know

By Sandra Showtime on Wednesday, January 14, 2009 - 09:35

Lesbians and bisexual women aren’t taken seriously. I wonder where this comes from? Well, I don’t know for sure, but reading the online magazine of the prestigious German newspaper Sueddeutsche gives me a hint. It seems like they try to make really sure everyone gets that being gay isn’t a big deal…since it’s just a phase anyway. *yawn

“Discover the possibilities – more and more heterosexual women have a bout at same-sex-love for a time. And the new lesbians are completely free from the previous political hate towards men , because they know: To tie theirselves down to one sexual orientation is just as frumpy as voting for the same party all life long.”

This “having relations to both”, men and women, sounds so familiar….Where do I know that from? Wait…there was even a word for it…damn, what was it? Ah, I remember: Bisexuality! :) But wouldn’t they have said that, if they mean it? Hm, this sounds more like the “new lesbians” aren’t really queer at all, but maybe a little bit bored when their real boyfriends are a little bit too often in the fitness center. I am confused, also about this “frumpy”. Does this mean I have to switch over to men again from time to time? I don’t want to be a babbit…but…do I really have to? :(

“One almost want to believe that there landed a spaceship lately, with a pack of beautiful, clever women, who announce loudly: “We fancy women. But not always. Only sometimes, when we are in the mood.”

Yep, I get you. I hate headache. But not always. Just sometimes, when I have one.

“What applies for workplace, for family structures and the choice of sexual partners, also applies for sexual orientation: Nothing is for eternity, every decision can be rolled back. “

Yeah, I just shifted my cell-phone-contract. What can I say? It’s so much cheaper now! :) I will do you a favor and forward this paragraph to Christian gay-reversion camps. I hope you get some money for the fancy advertising. Maybe for hiring not so frumpy writers? Just saying…

They even had interviews with some of those “new lesbians”:

“I just had fun with experimenting. This is why I thought it would be fun to have sex with a woman a couple of times. But I don’t categorize myself as bisexual because of that. It just happened. This friend is a lesbian and now lives with a woman. I live with a man.”

First of all, cheers to Nele that she knows this secret word “bisexual”! And yes, why categorizing anyway? You know, if we all are ready for that, let’s drop categories of sexual orientations and even gender at all. I’m in! But until then why not stopping writing silly articles about the “choice”, “hobby”, “lifestyle” of same-sex-relationships? Aren’t you just as bored, as we are from that? Why not swapping “frumpy” for “open-minded”?

But what do I know?...I’m just one of those “new heterosexuals”, who experimented with guys and is now back with women. Seems like it is for forever. Damn, I am antiquated.

Tags: human interest, press

new lesbians?

Submitted by Cath on January 14, 2009 - 13:07.

...new lesbians? What was wrong with the old ones?

And wait, didn't we already have a name for those "new lesbians"? Like "straight women who like to experiment"? (Not that there would be anything wrong with experimenting. But that does Not. Make. You. Gay.)

A dangerous backlash indeed - although it is quite common with straight folks who want to be supportive. They try to be nice and say things like "Oh, I'm straight, but, you know, gay isn't a bad thing, I could fall for someone of my own sex, too, sure, that's normal!"

And back we are at belittling homosexuality and calling it a choice. Oops. --- And oh yes, many lesbians are pro-choice, but I think some folks got the topic of that choice mixed up there. Sigh.

The notion of "We don't need labels!" is, on the other hand, painfully naive. While it is understandable on a personal level (and wouldn't it be wonderful) , it is impossible to disconnect from the political. And as long as hospitals sort the newborns into differently colored blankets according to sex, it won't work. As long as these patterns prevail, "no labels" only means that minorities will not be protected because in a world with no labels, well, theoretically there would be no minorities because everything is fluid and being gay wouldn't be a pattern of distinction.

Practically, however, it is (whether unfortunate or not) a most prominent pattern of distinction at the moment, so the application of a "no label" practice outrules itself. And the minority identity, other than the majority one, becomes negiotiable instead. (<sarcasm>and those transient states that are more of a personal whim, anyway, really don't need legal protection... pfff... those 'gays' could change if they wanted to, right? Well, if they're dumb enough not to want to change and stay that way just to annoy us... their problem!</sarcasm>)

And if "gay" is just a choice a hip straight woman makes on Friday nights at the bar after two drinks too many... where do we exist for the rest of the week? (well, there might be some space left in those new Californian chicken cages...)

Eye rolling

Submitted by Natazzz on January 14, 2009 - 13:23.

I did so much eye rolling while reading this post I now have a headache...

- - - - - - - - - -

-Everyone is entitled to be stupid, but some abuse the privilege.

I blog, therefore, I am

Ha ha, Kate Perry anybody...

Submitted by frosch411 on January 14, 2009 - 15:34.

"..I kissed a girl.. and I liked it..."

that popped straight (sic!!) into my mind...all aboard the bandwagon obviously.. sigh! Too many people are following some supposed trends... only for a few months later to discover it was a trend, and nothing lasting. We should just remind ourselves of that..trends come and go... but there's always those who don't conform!

My two cents!

______________________________________________________

frosch411 online frosch411 on AE

If you speak German and dare...

Submitted by Sandra Showtime on January 14, 2009 - 16:52.

...read the rest of the article in this magazine. It gets even worse on page 2. And feel free to register and post a comment, like me and some very smart and driven women.

O!M!G!

Submitted by bee charmer on January 14, 2009 - 20:58.

this article (i mean that of the süddeutsche not yours^^)must be the worst crap i've ever read.. and i've read a lot of crap in my life!

someone call the guiness book of world records guys, 'cause fnding so many stereotypes and mixing them all together into a piece of crap like this, that MUST be a new record!

damn, had i only known before that i can change my sexual orientation like my underwear and that i'm a not a faux-mosexual but a "new lesbian" if i have drunk sex with a woman once and then go back to men... geeeeeeez!

(Quote:) "But what do I

Submitted by Wienerin on January 15, 2009 - 00:57.

(Quote:)

"But what do I know?...I’m just one of those “new heterosexuals”, who
experimented with guys and is now back with women. Seems like it is for
forever."

Damn it, I thought I finally found my label in the L word. But now, on behalf of that new information, here my Coming Out: I am a New Heterosexual.

Always look on the bright side of life *pfeifpfeif*

I heart you guys, girls,

Submitted by Sandra Showtime on January 15, 2009 - 01:05.

I heart you guys, girls, humans...you what i mean :p

Regarding the German interview.....

Submitted by Peeti on February 11, 2009 - 20:12.

what exactly is Shelley Conn's take on Jessica's sexual orientation?

not sure...

Submitted by Sandra Showtime on February 11, 2009 - 20:45.

not sure what you are referring to, peeti. the article you commented on doesn't deal with shelley conn, but with the "new lesbians", which in this case meant for the newspaper, that homosexuality is not a big deal, because (in the subtitle) just a phase, anyway.

I don't find shelley conn mentioned in the comments, either. please help me out and tell me what you are referring to.

I misunderstood......

Submitted by Peeti on February 12, 2009 - 17:55.

Thanks Showtime for your response.....somehow I got the impression that Shelley Conn was interviewed in the German article. My bad.

Nevermind

Submitted by Sandra Showtime on February 12, 2009 - 18:54.

I'll look forward to it!

Submitted by Peeti on February 12, 2009 - 22:36.

I've just got to say that I'm loving this website. I'm really enjoying the content!