One thing I observe when someone is proclaiming themselves to have an alternative sexuality, normally of a homosexual variety, is that they will aspire to a situation when no-one will be concerned about someone’s sexuality. However, the interview then normally goes on to deal with the experiences of that person in “coming out” as gay or whatever. This latter questioning inherently contradicts the first track. They want their gayness to be ignored, but then they will flag up how it was such a big issue to come out. They then go on to say how people have been so kind and understanding about what they have done.
It seems then that, whilst saying they want the issue of sexuality to become a non-issue, they continue to make it an issue. Do they want to be seen as a bunch of bravehearts taking on the established consensus and therefore to be honoured? If that is so then they will not want a person’s sexuality to become a non-issue. Therein is the conundrum.