Disclaimer: I strongly support and advocate for gay rights. Same sex couples should be able to marry, have children (including adoption) and enjoy the full extent of freedom that exists in our country without judgment or discrimination.
That being said, as I watch the way gay people go about this quest for equality, I have come to believe that the argument of, 'we can't help it, we were born that way' is actually harmful to their cause.
This thought was sparked again when I read that Nate Berkus told Oprah how he explained his homosexuality to his dad. He said, 'why would I choose to make my life more difficult'?' To which his dad responded, 'If you say you were born this way, and you didn't have a choice, then we're good.'
So, as long as gay people wouldn't choose to be gay, they're acceptable? Why is the acceptance of gays cloaked in the helplessness of their actions? What's wrong with deciding on a same sex relationship just because one wants to?
Consider how anti-gay rights advocates might interpret Nate Berkus' statement and use it as evidence that even gay people know their relationships are inherently wrong:
If I could be straight, that would be so much better, but I was born defective and now I can't control my unnatural urges. Who would choose to be this miserable? Please don't sever our relationship because I have no control over my choices and need your sympathy and compassion. Gee, I wish things were different, but I'm stuck with this affliction and have been since birth.
As consenting adults, we have the right to love who we love and create the lifestyle that works for us at any given point in our lives. Yes, some people know from a very young age that they are gay. Others live much of their adult lives in opposite sex relationships first, or they move between same sex and opposite sex relationships throughout their lives. It's different for everyone.
My advice? Drop the 'we can't help it, we were born that way' argument and advocate from the perspective of your own right to choose who you will love. Because when seeking equal rights in a land that claims to be free, it shouldn't matter if you were born that way or not.
Friday, I took what I like to call an 'aromatic interlude' in my day. This means that what was supposed to be a little stroll in the sunshine turned into a mini sniff-a-thon at Nordstrom and Sephora.
Balenciaga perfumes have always been hit and miss for me, but I quite enjoy the 2010 release, Paris, and wanted to try the line's two new releases, Florabotanica and Paris L'Eau Rose. Of course, with Kristen Stewart as the face of Florabotanica, I expected a fruity floral blend targeted at young women fantasizing about their vampire lovers.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
On a scent strip, Florabotanica had an herbal vibe that piqued my interest. I asked for a sample so I could try it later on my skin while enjoying a glass of wine on Big Red. Same with Paris L'Eau Rose.
Honestly, I don't even remember the last time I scrubbed off a perfume, but Florabotanica drove me to it. Usually, I can wait for the drydown first, but not this time. Screechy and sharp, Florabotanica fails miserably on my skin. With a top note strong as ammonia, I cannot imagine an occasion for which this perfume is appropriate. A huge outdoor wedding would have everyone sniffing the air and asking, 'what stinks?'
Paris L'Eau Rose is less awful, but mind-numbingly dull. Imagine all of the Escada summer fragrances layered on top of one another. Next to L'Eau Rose, even Juicy Couture La La is a perfume of substance, a thought that keeps me up at night.
At this point, I simply hope that some time will pass before Balenciaga releases any more perfumes. At least long enough for the memory of scrubbing to fade.
images from theentertainmentlifestyle.com and mimifroufrou.com