Can Someone Be Homosexual and Not Gay? | Psychology Today

Contents:

• WHY I'M NOT PROUD OF BEG GAY
• DEAR LEFTISTS: ACTUALLY, NO, BEG GAY IS NOTHG TO BE 'PROUD' OF...
• WHY I DON'T CELEBRATE GAY PRI
• I'M NOT PROUD TO BE GAY
• HOW TO ACCEPT THAT YOU ARE GAY
• CAN SOMEONE BE HOMOSEXUAL AND NOT GAY?

WHY I'M NOT PROUD OF BEG GAY

I’m spired to engage this lguistic activy bee the annual "Pri Week" for gays and lbians is soon at hand, and I’m particularly terted knowg what is, exactly, that I’m supposed to be proud the followg two OED fns, for example, pri is portrayed as beg herently antisocial, a very, very bad thg: pri n. Now, if embracg "gay pri" were done simply for the slap--the-face-to-relign effect, I’d be all for .

Yet unfortunately—and to my ntued bewilrment—there are many gay people who are relig, so this acunt don’t seem to hold much water.

It’s not terribly surprisg, this light, that dividuals who are more prone to exhibg hubristic pri tend also to be more disagreeable, nrotic, narcissistic, are ls nscient and have a history of poor relatnships and mental health when to the exprsn "gay pri, " hubristic pri don’t seem to be implied.

DEAR LEFTISTS: ACTUALLY, NO, BEG GAY IS NOTHG TO BE 'PROUD' OF...

I’ve no doubt that some gays and lbians probably do believe, for some odd postmornist reason or another, that they are herently superr to straights.

WHY I DON'T CELEBRATE GAY PRI

But gay or straight, anyone who actually believ that social stat n be lculated on the basis of what their genals unnscly rpond to should be dismissed jt as swiftly as those who believe that God has a sore spot for pri. In any event, for the most part, hubristic pri appears to be the emotnal anthis of the feelgs meant to spire gay dividuals durg Pri Week.

I'M NOT PROUD TO BE GAY

I wonr, then, if perhaps there’s another OED fn that better reflects the te spir of "gay pri.

So "gay pri" unr the guise of thentic pri seems jt as problematic to me as do for hubristic pri.

HOW TO ACCEPT THAT YOU ARE GAY

Eher we elect to see ourselv as beg "born this way" and not of our own makg, which would lim our sense of pri to the hubristic subtype ("I’m better than you bee I’m gay"), or we mt subm to the tellectually impaired among and ntend that we’ve chosen this “liftyle” for some mendable reason.

I’m no more proud of beg gay than I am of beg Csian, of havg type I diabet, of beg 5'7"—okay, heels—or of havg abnormally stocky hands for a man my size. Like beg gay, the are simply the unassailable, blogilly-based facts about me, and what is, is. But, and here’s the real kicker, so listen up, the absence of pri is not is, alas, at least one OED fn that perhaps reflects the tend age of the exprsn "gay pri" and that seems to ronate wh s nnotatns.

CAN SOMEONE BE HOMOSEXUAL AND NOT GAY?

I n almost get on board wh this variatn of the term when ’s applied to "gay pri"—I know my gay history, Pri Week’s nnectns to the Stonewall Rts of June, 1969, I know my value as a human beg, and I’ve also had a genero slice of antigay bigotry directed at me—right at my forehead, fact.

) I suppose the only problem that I have wh this form of "gay pri"—and ’s substantially ls of a ncern than the other two forms, I should add—is rts on the assumptn of a largely mythil, llective gay inty.