[Vol. 12] Why Are We So Hung Up on Non-Binary Identities?
Seeing bisexuality and non-binary genders as dots on a spectrum rather than rule-breakers.
When you break a binary – like saying your favorite ice cream flavor is a chocolate-vanilla swirl – people get all hot and bothered. And not in a good way.
Let me explain.
When I came out as gay, although I feared rejection like the devil, I wasn’t so much worried about people second-guessing my identity. That’s because despite packing my bags and moving to what a homophobic person might say is the wrong side of the “straight or gay” binary, my identity didn’t break that binary.
Yes, there are those that might hate/dislike me for my sexuality, but I rarely worry about being invalidated on account of that.
For those that break these oh-so coveted binaries (think bisexuals and non-binary gendered folks) that same privilege isn’t there.
Not only do they have to struggle with existing as queer people in a homophobic/transphobic-leaning world, but they also have to weather the constant storm of invalidation that comes with breaking what people believe to be the truth – AKA “gay or straight”, “man or woman”, “chocolate or vanilla”.
Because they don’t fall neatly on either end of what most of us perceive to be the binaries of gender and sexuality, people can’t make sense of them. In their confusion, they lose their sense of boundaries, asking incessant questions about someone’s identity or even potentially lashing out to shame or hurt them.
If I had a penny for every time I’ve heard, “I just don’t get bisexuality" or “there are only two genders”, both from people close to me and in passing, I’d be able to melt em’ all down and build the Statue of Liberty a friend to hang out with.
I’ve never understood this. Why is everyone so pressed when it comes to binary-breaking identities?
Let’s explore, shall we?
Not to keep you in suspense, but didn’t get ‘That’s Gay’ in your inbox? Make sure you get it next time and subscribe below.
And, and, and – consider helping to get the word out! Tell a friend, DM, Instagram, Twitter, Facebook – whichever poison you prefer, word of mouth, a few clicks, and a share are the only way the That’s Gay community is going to grow.
I got inspired to write on this topic while horizontal in bed and binge-watching wayyy too much TV.
*So next time someone says that isn’t a good use of your time, tell them you’re just doing research 😉
This newsletter was born out of a Sex and the City/Insecure binge.
I’ve already confessed my love for the Sex and the City series in writing before – not to mention I’ve decided to label myself an “aspiring queer Carrie Bradshaw” in my Twitter bio – but I guess I’ll come out of the closet for everyone here once again: I’m a SATC–super-fan. Love the show to death, will continue to watch every episode four-times over (although I’m not a huge fan of the plan to resuscitate it).
Insecure, on the other hand, is a show I’ve only recently started watching – but I’m fresh off of a seven-episode binge and I love it. Based on the hit comedy web-series, The Mis-Adventures of Awkward Black Girl, Insecure stars the web-series’ creator, Issa Rae, and follows her character, also named Issa, as she navigates life, love, workplace politics etc. in Los Angeles as a black woman. It’s heart-warming, it’ll make you laugh out loud, and it tells important stories from an underrepresented perspective. If you have access to HBO, I highly recommend you check it out.
Unlike SATC, Insecure is a relatively new series – at least in comparison to a show that aired its first episode the year I was born. And yet …
both shows spotlight society’s inability to wrap its collective head around bisexuality.
While Insecure does it on purpose to expose the hypocrisy of it all – especially as it relates to dating in the black community – SATC seems to do it more genuinely, which is probably a product of the time in which it was shot.
There’s a near-identical plot line in both shows where a female character grapples with the revelation that their boyfriend has had *sexy times* with other guys. While in SATC the boyfriend identifies as bisexual, Insecure’s bisexual plotline leans more towards sexual experimentation – basically, the man admits to having gotten head from a guy friend once on a drunk night out in college.
In both cases, the female character runs to her friend group in desperation; in both cases, the friend group jokes that he’s gay and ultimately leaves her with the impression that she should stop talking to him; in both cases, she dumps the guy (despite really liking him).
*In SATC, the guy is out of the picture permanently. In Insecure, I don’t know yet. But I have a good feeling he’ll make a return :)
The lesson learned? Binary-breakers aren’t legit.
What motivates both women to dump their S/O ultimately boils down to the fear that they might really just be gay.
Depending on other aspects of their identity, everyone that identifies somewhere in between a perceived binary is going to get a different brand of doubt for it. Bisexual men will be told they’re just gay. Bisexual women will be told they’re just straight. Non-binary gendered people will be told to “pick a side”.
All will be told their identity is not valid.
I think the only way for people who’re hung up on non-binary sexual and gender identities to get over their hang-ups is for them to challenge the traditionally-held belief that sexuality and gender exist as binaries at all.
The problem with binary vision.
If we view sexuality and gender as binaries, it’s clear how we may react uncomfortably to people who “do both” – because how could it be possible for someone to exist on both sides of a binary (whether that be gender or sexuality)?
If you think of it as someone existing in two places at once, it doesn’t seem probable.
In both SATC and Insecure, that kind of thinking leads to the downfall of an otherwise great relationship. In SATC, Carrie Bradshaw becomes obsessed with knowing whether or not her boyfriend would choose a hot girl on the street over a hot guy; in Insecure, Molly, Issa’s best friend, can’t stop picturing her man with other men. In both cases, the women are trying to feel out where their S/O’s true sexual orientation lies, because again, they couldn’t possibly exist on either end at once.
Not in two places at once, but somewhere in-between.
In recent years, there’s been mounting support for the spectrum model of sex, gender, and sexuality, which basically holds true that one’s identity exists on a spectrum rather than on a binary.
Somewhat surprisingly (and completely randomly), I found a great summary of the spectrum model on the University of South Dakota’s “Diversity and Inclusiveness” training page.
“The spectrum model more accurately represents the ways in which an individual’s sex, gender identity, gender expression and sexual and romantic orientations do not always exist as opposite endpoints. They can exist in any combination, and a person's placement on one spectrum does not necessarily determine their placement on any of the others.”
Couldn’t have said it better myself.
But with these intangible subjects, sometimes it’s not so much about saying things as it is about visualizing things, so to that end, here’s a little diagram from an “Allies Packet” posted by Moreno Valley College (another random school that’s reposted surprisingly good LGBTQ+ resources).
I know there’s a lot crammed into one diagram here, and while I encourage you to explore the entirety of it and search things up as you go, let’s focus specifically on the spectrums of gender identity and sexual orientation for now.
Making room for binary in-betweeners - and outsiders.
If we look at “man or woman”, “gay or straight” as endpoints of a spectrum rather than the only two options of a binary choice, we’re effectively expanding our view of what a person can identify as – which, in my opinion, is traditionally much too limited.
Just as a choice between chocolate or vanilla wouldn’t satisfy a chocolate-vanilla-swirl-lover, or a strawberry-lover, or a mint chocolate chip-lover, being forced to choose to exist at either endpoint of gender and sexuality is something that just doesn’t make sense for some people.
And why should it make sense? If identity exists on a spectrum, what sense does it make to push people in either direction when they can technically fall anywhere on that line? In fact, why hold people to a spot on that line at all?
If you can, at the very least, entertain the spectrum model, I’m sure you’ll end up spending much more time asking these questions than you do questioning others’ identities.
Today’s discussion Q:
Why do you think gender and sexuality are such incendiary topics? What is it about how someone chooses to identify themselves that gets people all riled up?
Let me know your thoughts in the comments below! As always, I’ll be reading/responding to all.
And that was That’s Gay, Volume 12. See you in Volume 13, folks!
Want Volume 13? Not signed up yet?
Share this newsletter and help my baby grow!
I'll just comment on my own question here, because why not.
I'm not alone in questioning why people get so passionate and heated about another person's gender or sexuality (or identity in general). There's a whole Reddit thread (and probably countless more like it) fueled by this very question – find it here: https://bit.ly/2MgabCC
Taking a scroll through that thread (which I highly recommend) is to see just how many different reasons people can come up with for why we're so pressed about each others' identities (esp. LGBTQ+ identities). From colonialism, to religion, to more secular tradition, to status quo, to what's considered "natural" and what isn't, the path to just accepting and loving someone for who they proclaim themselves to be is littered with ideological landmines.
Personally, I'm of the school of thought that human beings just don't like change. Whenever there's a new idea flung our way, we push back against it because we're uncomfortable with "the way things are" becoming "the way things aren't". What's so ironic about this thinking though is that, when it comes to LGBTQ+ identities, these are not new ideas – diverse identities that don't adhere to binaries have existed for as long as human beings have walked this Earth.
So maybe it isn't that we're uncomfortable with new things, maybe it's that we're just uncomfortable with what we don't know yet.