I have no problem with statements of preference: I prefer women to men, red wine to white and dry martinis. Beyond that point I think taste shades into ideology.

But a lot of people name their identity based on what regularly floats their hormones, as opposed to some absolute shibboleth.

I’m straight. After the standard youthful questioning about that (the fact that I don’t fit last century stereotypes of feral manhood means that, like 1/2 my male classmates in the 70s/80s, I got called a faggot all the time), it’s really quite clear. I find lots of women attractive. In fact, almost any woman that I like and respect is at least somewhat attractive to me sexually.

That doesn’t mean that I haven’t fantasized or admired men, or had some homosexual experiences. they just don’t happen often. I flirted with identity as bi, but that feels like appropriation when I did not have any active SS relationship or any real desire for one.

I basically agree with seth that politics has a lot to do with people’s sexual identity labels, and that most people’s sexual preferences are not as unipolar as they present.

I knew one gay man who addressed a question about of this sort on a mailing list with something like [paraphrased and remembered vaguely] “hell yes I have sex with women and enjoy it. That doesn’t make me not gay. I’m gay enough for society to hate me for it, so I choose to call myself gay.”

I don’t think it’s realistic to make proclamations about this stuff without some understanding of the politics of het-privilege and how that affects people’s identity decisions on both sides and in the middle.

I can only speak for myself, of course, but having spent a couple of years studying philosophy and comp-lit-crit, I’m well aware of the problem you mention. Every generalization contains some injustice when applied to an individual and writing a novel about the sexual self-discovery of someone is infinitely superior to simply classifying someone as “gay” and leaving it at that. That said, I think some of our categories have been proven to be useful shortcuts that correspond to phenomena in an underlying reality. Discarding everything as an ideological construct is simply not feasible and if someone self-identifies as “gay”, I’m not going to tell him that he cannot really be sure about that and that his sexual identity is just an ideological eggshell or whatever. Rather, I’d conclude that he feels physically attracted to men and while there is probably a lot more to say about his sexuality and personality, it’s not wrong as such to apply that label.

For me, prior to transitioning, I very much didn’t want to be seen as a gay man; in part, perhaps, because I simply didn’t like being seen as a man, full stop. Now, some way along the line, and with my own self-loathing gone, I am more comfortable with men, and have accepted the possibility that I could have a physical relationship with one. Speaking hypothetically, of course.

Regarding couples who stay together after one of them transitions, there can be many reasons for the continuation of the partnership; inertia and the pragmatic desire to avoid upheaval can be quite influential considerations too… hardly the ideal recipe for a happy-ever-after story, but I understand that it happens.

I dunno. The “I always knew it” lesbians (can we still call them that? Wasn’t there a Greek courtcase? ;) ) I know are on the whole pretty fixed in their sexual preference. The ones who found out later are seem to be more fluid but I’m not sure wether that is because they are less rigid in their preference or wether they were in denial before. Even in a gay-friendly country it is still a deviation from the norm to be homosexual, and many people don’t like to be too different.

But maybe it is a male/female thing? I’ve heard about couples that stayed a couple after he became female, thus becoming a female/female couple. I even heard about couples where both partners were transgendered females (mayor of Cambridge). But are there also couples that stayed a couple after she became male?

Well, that still leaves 85% of gays and lesbians who have a clear sexual preference and a 15% rate of bisexuals or people just being a little adventurous, flexible or confused doesn’t strike me as that outrageous. And I’m not saying that such a preference is totally set in stone, after all it’s not going to kill you to have sex with somebody not fitting your sexual orientation and stranger things have happened after a couple of pints. But from my experience the sexual orientation of gay men is very pronounced, which is why we correctly label them and they label themselves as gay. Things seem to be a bit more fluid with lesbians.

What was that study awhile back about gay men and lesbian women having sex? Wasn’t that something like %15? I remember the reaction in the GLBT community was “Whaaa? How can that be?” That’s what I mean about letting words and concepts define who you are. And I can tell you from personal experience as a GLBT person, ya’ll ain’t as straight as you like to think you are. You may talk a good game in public but when the lights are out…. my oh my.

None of this is meant as a comment about Dru, who seems to be more a person than a preference. Normalcy comes in many forms.