Alright, this is the first time I've actually commented on a Substack. I guess this is also where I publicly come out as bisexual since it's relevant to the conversation & can hopefully shed some light. While I find your argument interesting, I think you make a few errors in your reasoning:
Alright, this is the first time I've actually commented on a Substack. I guess this is also where I publicly come out as bisexual since it's relevant to the conversation & can hopefully shed some light. While I find your argument interesting, I think you make a few errors in your reasoning:
You question the decline of closeting by asking: "Why would older LGBTs stay in the closet as the stigma plummets?"
Here, I think you underestimate the power of the status quo. I've talked to quite a few people who have always considered themselves straight, but when the topic of sexuality arises they admit *some level* of homosexuality/homosexual ideation. But these are people with children, sometimes grandchildren, who have been married for decades. There's no conscious or subconscious driver for them to identify as bisexual; they are unlikely to act on it or actualize their sexuality, therefore the risk/reward metric is against coming out. At best, nothing changes. At worst, maybe their spouse or children etc. feel betrayed. I'll specify: I'm not claiming that these people feel repressed against coming out etc. My position is that they've lived as straight for decades, so why bother thinking about their sexuality? They're doing just fine as is.
You then state: "Another weakness of the closeting story is that mainstream stigma against bisexuals was always milder than against any of the other groups. Yet it is bisexuality that has exploded."
I think this fact *supports* the closeting story if anything. Think about it: someone who is only same-sex attracted is more likely to come out regardless of stigma because they are unable to live a romantic life without coming out. However, someone who is able to live a perfectly content life with only opposite-sex partners despite some same-sex attraction has a greater barrier to coming out due to stigma. The decline of anti-gay stigma reduces the perceived costs for coming out, allowing those edge cases (bisexuals) to feel freer to identify as they wish.
Additionally, I would argue that the reduced stigma has further allowed bisexuals like myself to attach words to their attractions. Throughout my entire childhood, growing up in a conservative Christian household with zero engagement/recruitment opportunities, I still held some attraction to my male peers. But in the absence of words to explain these feelings, I viewed these as nothing more than intrusive thoughts, much like the French l'appel du vide (call of the void)—you know, the voice that tells you to swerve into oncoming traffic or step off the cliff despite you having zero suicidal ideation. The reduction of stigma gave me tools to reassess how I feel toward different sexes and realize that while I'm mostly sexually attracted to women, I also hold some sexual attraction toward men.
Additionally, when you say "Younger people’s identities, however, have turned out to be much more flexible than I ever would have imagined back in the 1980s," I wonder what your understanding was of the counterculture of the late 60s and 70s. From the Stonewall Riots to hippie/"free love" culture, I wonder if this is just a failure of imagination on the part of 1980s Bryan and people like him. This isn't a moral judgement, but simply an observation with 20/20 hindsight that the signs have always been there that peoples' sexualities are very flexible, especially at earlier ages where "experimentation" (sexual and non-sexual) is frequent.
You then say "the identity that has grown the most is the identity that asks the least."
I think this gets back to the decline of closeting issue. If my coming out is not necessary for me to live a fulfilling romantic and family life, why would I—a man married to a woman—do so in the face of anti-gay stigma? Now that the stigma is almost entirely gone, it's much easier to come out. Where the only people who came out in the past were those who *needed to* in order to be romantically and sexually active, now people like me are able to come out because, well, it's just how we feel and who cares? Coming out is a much lesser deal for bisexuals now because it's just a matter of "cool, what do you want for dinner?"
Finally, you wrap up with this: "Yet over time, the LGBT phenotype is exploding while the LGBT genotype is imploding ."
I don't know that there's much serious argumentation that homosexuality is heritable. If there is, I haven't seen it. We don't know much about the genetics indicators of homosexuality, but most recent research has shown that it's not *nature VS nurture*, but *nature AND nurture*. Studies have identified a few different genetic markers that *might* be indicators of homosexuality, but they're not entirely reliable. One study estimated that genetics may account for ~25% of homosexual identification. So while you're likely correct that there is some significant cultural impact, I think you misunderstand the opposing view to yours and also overweight the impact of "recruitment."
At the end of the day, homosexuality and its subsets are multivariate in causal nature that we'll likely never fully understand due to the complex nature of the brain that guides them. I think your analysis is likely correct in *some* part, but your weighting is significantly off and your understanding of the motivations of coming out (especially for those of us who are "asked the least") is way off.
Now, I'm just one case of a broad spectrum of different types of LGBT people, but I hope this helps explain some aspects and clarify some confusion. Keep up the interesting conversations and analysis—glad you're on Substack now!
Excellent points throughout, and I generally agree. I'm gen-x and bisexual and about a Kinsey 2, and am quietly out, ie I'm happy to say I'm bisexual but don't generally mention it if I doesn't come up. I suspect I'm right on the cusp -- if I'd been five years older, at least in the particular milieu in which I grew up, I suspect I wouldn't have bothered to be out unless it was er, immediately and directly relevant with a particular person.
This is a very compelling case. And there is more than stigma. Telling your wife you are bisexual is like telling your wife you have a crush for tall women, and she is short. I mean, what is the goal? Are you going to cheat? Divorce? You just don't talk to your partner about attraction to other people. Not if you are mono at least.
Thanks for your comment! I also think there is likely a significant epigenetic aspect to sexual orientation, which speaks to your "nature AND nurture" point. There are also considerations for the various ways in which estrogens are floating around, such as that entering the water from birth control (and not filtered out because it's a newly recognized issue) or microplastics somehow getting everywhere. I would be surprised if increased estrogen (and the concomitant drops in testosterone) didn't have an effect on the prevalence of varying gender identities and sexual orientations, especially prior to the completion of puberty given the incredibly plasticity of the brain in that time range.
Also I'm not sure to what degree GSM (gender/sexual minorities) genotypes are imploding seeing as they likely arise through the interactions of multiple genes in addition to the environment. There could be plenty of people who carry a large share of these genes but who still have a normal (yes, normal) phenotype and end up reproducing at a rate similar to any other person. And then there are those like me who are very much gay and intend to have lots of kids...
Yes, epigenetics! There is a false binary between “genetic” and “environmental”. Through chemicals, stress, weather, diet, and activity, and habit, different genes can be toggled off and on. So it doesn’t make sense to claim that something is either purely genetic or purely social recruitment.
Sexual preference is a spectrum. Most straights have some gay in us. Most gays have some straight.
I particularly remember a stag party where, as was the custom at the time, a porn video was shown supposedly to train the bridegroom to be. The two girls were the stuff wet dreams are made of but the stud was older, bepaunched, balding and nothing exceptional in the trouser department. I remember the groans of disappointment. The stud in a porno has to be sexy in a way that men will think sexy. Men get more turned on by a porno if the stud is sexy.
I didn't know that stag parties were to train the groom - what a ridiculous concept - men were expected to be experienced even when women were not. (This is before my time.) But to your main point, yes, porn videos are only fun to watch (IMHO) if the guy(s) as well as the girl(s) are attractive.
Is that a form of homosexuality? I would say yes, but I think of myself as open-minded and you should ask a bunch of outspokenly anti-gay frat boys whether they prefer an old fat guy or a young stud in the (hetero) porn that they watch. I'd bet a large sum of cash on the stud.
Alright, this is the first time I've actually commented on a Substack. I guess this is also where I publicly come out as bisexual since it's relevant to the conversation & can hopefully shed some light. While I find your argument interesting, I think you make a few errors in your reasoning:
You question the decline of closeting by asking: "Why would older LGBTs stay in the closet as the stigma plummets?"
Here, I think you underestimate the power of the status quo. I've talked to quite a few people who have always considered themselves straight, but when the topic of sexuality arises they admit *some level* of homosexuality/homosexual ideation. But these are people with children, sometimes grandchildren, who have been married for decades. There's no conscious or subconscious driver for them to identify as bisexual; they are unlikely to act on it or actualize their sexuality, therefore the risk/reward metric is against coming out. At best, nothing changes. At worst, maybe their spouse or children etc. feel betrayed. I'll specify: I'm not claiming that these people feel repressed against coming out etc. My position is that they've lived as straight for decades, so why bother thinking about their sexuality? They're doing just fine as is.
You then state: "Another weakness of the closeting story is that mainstream stigma against bisexuals was always milder than against any of the other groups. Yet it is bisexuality that has exploded."
I think this fact *supports* the closeting story if anything. Think about it: someone who is only same-sex attracted is more likely to come out regardless of stigma because they are unable to live a romantic life without coming out. However, someone who is able to live a perfectly content life with only opposite-sex partners despite some same-sex attraction has a greater barrier to coming out due to stigma. The decline of anti-gay stigma reduces the perceived costs for coming out, allowing those edge cases (bisexuals) to feel freer to identify as they wish.
Additionally, I would argue that the reduced stigma has further allowed bisexuals like myself to attach words to their attractions. Throughout my entire childhood, growing up in a conservative Christian household with zero engagement/recruitment opportunities, I still held some attraction to my male peers. But in the absence of words to explain these feelings, I viewed these as nothing more than intrusive thoughts, much like the French l'appel du vide (call of the void)—you know, the voice that tells you to swerve into oncoming traffic or step off the cliff despite you having zero suicidal ideation. The reduction of stigma gave me tools to reassess how I feel toward different sexes and realize that while I'm mostly sexually attracted to women, I also hold some sexual attraction toward men.
Additionally, when you say "Younger people’s identities, however, have turned out to be much more flexible than I ever would have imagined back in the 1980s," I wonder what your understanding was of the counterculture of the late 60s and 70s. From the Stonewall Riots to hippie/"free love" culture, I wonder if this is just a failure of imagination on the part of 1980s Bryan and people like him. This isn't a moral judgement, but simply an observation with 20/20 hindsight that the signs have always been there that peoples' sexualities are very flexible, especially at earlier ages where "experimentation" (sexual and non-sexual) is frequent.
You then say "the identity that has grown the most is the identity that asks the least."
I think this gets back to the decline of closeting issue. If my coming out is not necessary for me to live a fulfilling romantic and family life, why would I—a man married to a woman—do so in the face of anti-gay stigma? Now that the stigma is almost entirely gone, it's much easier to come out. Where the only people who came out in the past were those who *needed to* in order to be romantically and sexually active, now people like me are able to come out because, well, it's just how we feel and who cares? Coming out is a much lesser deal for bisexuals now because it's just a matter of "cool, what do you want for dinner?"
Finally, you wrap up with this: "Yet over time, the LGBT phenotype is exploding while the LGBT genotype is imploding ."
I don't know that there's much serious argumentation that homosexuality is heritable. If there is, I haven't seen it. We don't know much about the genetics indicators of homosexuality, but most recent research has shown that it's not *nature VS nurture*, but *nature AND nurture*. Studies have identified a few different genetic markers that *might* be indicators of homosexuality, but they're not entirely reliable. One study estimated that genetics may account for ~25% of homosexual identification. So while you're likely correct that there is some significant cultural impact, I think you misunderstand the opposing view to yours and also overweight the impact of "recruitment."
At the end of the day, homosexuality and its subsets are multivariate in causal nature that we'll likely never fully understand due to the complex nature of the brain that guides them. I think your analysis is likely correct in *some* part, but your weighting is significantly off and your understanding of the motivations of coming out (especially for those of us who are "asked the least") is way off.
Now, I'm just one case of a broad spectrum of different types of LGBT people, but I hope this helps explain some aspects and clarify some confusion. Keep up the interesting conversations and analysis—glad you're on Substack now!
Excellent points throughout, and I generally agree. I'm gen-x and bisexual and about a Kinsey 2, and am quietly out, ie I'm happy to say I'm bisexual but don't generally mention it if I doesn't come up. I suspect I'm right on the cusp -- if I'd been five years older, at least in the particular milieu in which I grew up, I suspect I wouldn't have bothered to be out unless it was er, immediately and directly relevant with a particular person.
This is a very compelling case. And there is more than stigma. Telling your wife you are bisexual is like telling your wife you have a crush for tall women, and she is short. I mean, what is the goal? Are you going to cheat? Divorce? You just don't talk to your partner about attraction to other people. Not if you are mono at least.
Thanks for your comment! I also think there is likely a significant epigenetic aspect to sexual orientation, which speaks to your "nature AND nurture" point. There are also considerations for the various ways in which estrogens are floating around, such as that entering the water from birth control (and not filtered out because it's a newly recognized issue) or microplastics somehow getting everywhere. I would be surprised if increased estrogen (and the concomitant drops in testosterone) didn't have an effect on the prevalence of varying gender identities and sexual orientations, especially prior to the completion of puberty given the incredibly plasticity of the brain in that time range.
Also I'm not sure to what degree GSM (gender/sexual minorities) genotypes are imploding seeing as they likely arise through the interactions of multiple genes in addition to the environment. There could be plenty of people who carry a large share of these genes but who still have a normal (yes, normal) phenotype and end up reproducing at a rate similar to any other person. And then there are those like me who are very much gay and intend to have lots of kids...
Yes, epigenetics! There is a false binary between “genetic” and “environmental”. Through chemicals, stress, weather, diet, and activity, and habit, different genes can be toggled off and on. So it doesn’t make sense to claim that something is either purely genetic or purely social recruitment.
Sexual preference is a spectrum. Most straights have some gay in us. Most gays have some straight.
I particularly remember a stag party where, as was the custom at the time, a porn video was shown supposedly to train the bridegroom to be. The two girls were the stuff wet dreams are made of but the stud was older, bepaunched, balding and nothing exceptional in the trouser department. I remember the groans of disappointment. The stud in a porno has to be sexy in a way that men will think sexy. Men get more turned on by a porno if the stud is sexy.
Orr maybe it's that we can understand how the stud gets those girls but find it a bit absurd to think the fat, bald, old guy gets them too.
I didn't know that stag parties were to train the groom - what a ridiculous concept - men were expected to be experienced even when women were not. (This is before my time.) But to your main point, yes, porn videos are only fun to watch (IMHO) if the guy(s) as well as the girl(s) are attractive.
Is that a form of homosexuality? I would say yes, but I think of myself as open-minded and you should ask a bunch of outspokenly anti-gay frat boys whether they prefer an old fat guy or a young stud in the (hetero) porn that they watch. I'd bet a large sum of cash on the stud.
You don't think using the name "Bear" gave anything away?