Good for her. It’s what I always assumed she meant. I suspected then, and suspect even more now, that her earlier pique, and the ambiguity she was telegraphing in her earlier statement, all came down to people knocking her for being bi.
I’ve heard other gay people claim that bisexuals don’t exist, they’re just gays in denial, etc. And while I’m sure some gay people use the bisexual label as a kind of beard, why shouldn’t we believe that bisexuals exist? After all, I’ve met people who on a scale from one to ten, ten being uber-gay and one being uber-straight, were tens, or even 7s (as my gay lunch companion admitted to me today) – and I’ve met straight guys who were 1s or 2s, so why can’t there be 5s as well?
In any case, I’m sorry that we had to come down so hard on someone who has really been there for our community – Nixon has been great lobbying on marriage, for example – but in the end, I think it was an educational discussion that helped us to flesh out what it means to be gay, or even bi. And that’s a good thing. Kudos to Cynthia for stepping up and resolving the confusion.
Here’s part of Nixon’s statement from the Advocate (they have all of it):
“While I don’t often use the word, the technically precise term for my orientation is bisexual. I believe bisexuality is not a choice, it is a fact. What I have ‘chosen’ is to be in a gay relationship.
“As I said in the Times and will say again here, I do, however, believe that most members of our community — as well as the majority of heterosexuals — cannot and do not choose the gender of the persons with whom they seek to have intimate relationships because, unlike me, they are only attracted to one sex.
“Our community is not a monolith, thank goodness, any more than America itself is. I look forward to and will continue to work toward the day when America recognizes all of us as full and equal citizens.”