I Wasn’t “Born This Way”, and I’m Proud of It
I am regularly accused of being a “fake lesbian”, a “heterosexual pretending to be a lesbian”, told I must be bisexual rather than exclusively same-sex attracted, and that I am somehow “colonising” lesbian culture and identity.
All of this comes my way because I don’t believe in the gay gene. What I do believe is that any woman, in the right circumstances, meeting the right person, and being in the right frame of mind, could choose to embark on a sexual relationship with another woman, whether or not she has previously only had relationships with men. You may say that this would make her bisexual (and for some it does), but what about all those women who have never looked back, and from that moment on are exclusively attracted to and have relationships with other women? A so-called “late-blooming lesbian” isn’t necessarily a woman who is older (by whatever measure) — it can simply mean a woman who has a heterosexual history. Many such women view themselves as lesbian, and often identify as such.
In the past, when I have said I would describe myself as a “political lesbian” (and partly because I was a bit flippant in my description of what the term means), it has been assumed I was saying that straight women could talk themselves — or even be forced — into being sexually attracted to other women. What I actually meant was that I am very political about my lesbianism. I also refuse to accept that unless a woman is born with this imagined and rather elusive gene, she could never make a positive choice to be in a relationship with another woman. I know so many women who had no previous inkling that this could ever happen but who then met a woman, fell head over heels in love (or lust) with her, and for whom the rest is history.
Lesbians, whether consciously or not, inherently represent a major disruption to patriarchy; we have always been the movers and shakers within the women’s liberation movement. Why, then, do so many appear to be either complacent about or even hostile to feminism? Not all feminists are lesbians, and not all lesbians are feminists. And how come, rather than celebrate the fact that loads of women are now coming out later in life and leaving heterosexuality behind, do so many remain wedded to the idea of a “gay gene” and the notion that unless you were “born that way” you should either resign yourself to remaining straight forever — or declare yourself bisexual?
I understand that some people are happy to settle for tolerance and acceptance and have no interest whatsoever in liberation movements. Lesbians, gay men, and bisexual people are still sometimes punished for their same-sex attraction and encounters, even though things in the Western world are very different now than they were back in 1977, when I came out in a traditional working-class community in a town in the northeast of England.
At that time, many (if not most) gay and bi men were not out — and therefore inevitably facing discrimination or even abuse, and what they pleaded for was just to be seen as the same as everyone else. “We were born this way,” they shrugged. “We can’t help it.”
By contrast, proud lesbians were on the streets, chanting “Two, four, six, eight, is your wife really straight?” At the height of the women’s liberation movement, huge swathes of women who had been in heterosexual relationships left their marriages to live lesbian lives. The movement had provided women with opportunities to see each other differently than they had before, and although some women would never feel the vaguest hint of sexual or romantic attraction towards another female, plenty of those who had never previously considered it an option grabbed the opportunity with both hands when it arose.
There’s a great scene in the 2014 film Pride — a comedy-drama based on a true story involving lesbian and gay activists who raised money to help families affected by the British miners' strike in 1984 — in which lesbians are singing, to the tune of “Solidarity Forever”, “Every woman is a lesbian at heart…”
Reggie, a gay male character, looks aghast: “You can’t possibly say that every woman is a lesbian.” The women beg to differ, even suggesting that Reggie’s mum might be a bit Sapphic.
This was clever scripting because the arguments about whether or not there is any genetic basis for same-sex attraction often are between lesbians and gay men. Or rather, between lesbian feminists and the more conservative type of gay man.
I am proud of being a lesbian, and certainly wouldn’t want it any other way. When I first came out, I was regularly asked, “If there was a drug that would make you straight, would you take it?” The underlying assumption was that it was being a lesbian that was the problem, rather than homophobic prejudice. Once my consciousness had been raised, I’d answer by suggesting we look at “curing” the bigots.
I love being a lesbian and consider it way preferable to heterosexuality. I do not seek to be merely “tolerated” by straight people. There is no kink in my genes that resulted in my sexual orientation, nor is my brain coloured with stripes of the rainbow flag.
This is what I meant when, in the past, I have described myself as a political lesbian. I no longer do because the lesbians who were frontline warriors within the Lesbian and Gay Liberation Movement saddled the label with too much baggage. These campaigners staged outrageous protests such as abseiling down the House of Lords during the debate about Section 28, which banned the promotion of homosexuality by local authorities and the portrayal of it as a “pretended family relationship.” Other demonstrations included chaining themselves to the chair of a news anchor during a live broadcast at the BBC. The action I was involved in was an invasion of the Ideal Home Exhibition in London. We occupied the display home and unfurled banners reading “Lesbians are everywhere” and “Lesbian mothers make the best mothers.”
Julie Bindel (top left) and other activists protesting Section 28 at the Ideal Home Exhibition in London, 1988. Source: The Times.
Seeking permission to replicate the behaviour and lifestyle of the mainstream straight population didn’t really change anything, despite the fact that this normality was indeed what many lesbians and gay men sought. It just meant that life became a bit of a lottery: there were those who accepted you as one of them, and those who didn’t. This is why some of us rejected the notion that we were the same as straight people and kept on campaigning. Lesbians like me didn’t campaign for equal marriage — as feminists, we wanted to abolish it as a patriarchal institution that could never be reformed.
In a bid to garner more sympathy from those who recognised that same-sex attracted people were oppressed, gay men (and some lesbians) would put forward the “proof” that we were born with an inherent sexual orientation. Even putting aside the problematic nature of ascribing sexual attraction to a foetus or newborn baby, the evidence has never materialised. The nature versus nurture question has engaged scientists, religious fundamentalists, parents, and LGBT people for well over a hundred years. Beyond the Nazi experimental stage, this was in many ways a valiant attempt to discredit the idea of homosexuality as a mental disorder — but there is still no evidence showing that same-sex attraction is innate.
Lisa Diamond, associate professor of psychology and gender studies at the University of Utah, has explored the topic of shifting sexual attraction in women. Her 2008 book, Sexual Fluidity: Understanding Women's Love and Desire, was based on a study of a group of 79 women, all of whom had some level of same-sex attraction. Every two years, 20% to 30% changed the way they described themselves as either gay, straight, or bisexual. By the end of the study, around two-thirds reported changing their orientation, suggesting that women's sexual identities are considerably more fluid than men's.
The findings contradict the broad consensus that a person's sexuality is determined more by genes than environment. According to Diamond, women developing sexual desire for other women later in life can often be wrongly dismissed as repressed lesbians coming to terms with their true feelings. I have seen women who’d sworn they were lifelong lesbians fall for a man and come out as bisexual. But Diamond’s hypothesis caused controversy amongst some gay rights activists. They argued that if sexual orientation is not “fixed at birth”, homophobes would insist that children could be “recruited” into the gay or lesbian lifestyle, and that it would strengthen the claim that “conversion therapy” can be effective.
Conversion therapy of the kind practised by Christian fundamentalists and others who, for whatever reason, consider same-sex attraction dangerous or morally wrong, is not what it appears to be. I should know, because in 2013, I went undercover for an intensive week of lesbian conversion therapy at a Christian centre. I discovered that these people do not for one minute think they can change sexual attraction by simply telling you that you had an unhappy childhood, or that the kink in your nature was caused by early experiences of sexual abuse. They just want you to stop being a lesbian. They don’t really care what the origin of this behaviour is. My therapist was very blasé when I asked her, in my adopted persona, if she thought I would ever meet a nice man and be able to settle down with him after all these decades of sinful behaviour with women. She simply shrugged, and her eyes glazed over. She didn’t actually think I could be counselled out of my same-sex attraction, but she’d have considered it a job well done if I became a lifelong celibate and denounced lesbianism to my friends and the wider public.
The “born this way” argument has never helped those who do have innate characteristics — such as black people or women. Uttering the words, “Don’t pick on me, I can’t help it,” has never protected anyone from abuse and discrimination.
Feminists (the actual as opposed to the fun kind) understand that lesbians have an advantage in that we get to avoid the grossly unequal, patriarchal relationships that are upheld by every institution and normalised within society. Gay men are on the back foot because they have missed out on being the head of the household. This is rather a crude generalisation, but it is nevertheless true for many women. We recognise the liberatory elements of avoiding compulsory heterosexuality and being with women.
Political lesbianism has nothing to do with straight women claiming to be lesbians to make a point. Since the backlash against feminism and the distorting of lesbian politics by critical queer theorists, many women seem to think that being political about being a lesbian is “fake lesbianism” done for the sake of punishing men.
I believe that lesbianism is a political act in its own right — it doesn’t mean pretended desire, and neither does it mean straight women appropriating a lesbian culture or identity. Political lesbianism is not about pretending not to be attracted to men as an act of feminist sacrifice. It’s about giving women the option of asking themselves whether they have been railroaded into heterosexuality.
Claiming that lesbians are “born this way” can be a barrier to women coming out in later life, having been previously heterosexual. It ignores the fact that social conditioning can result in women ignoring or suppressing their desire for other women and seeing it as a “passing phase.” And it can also lead to the opinion that only a tiny number of women (the ones with a kink in their genes) have the potential to love and desire other women.
The “born this way” explanation for lesbianism is popular with many straight people because it reassures them that there is no danger of it rubbing off on them. I love the sense that I have chosen my sexuality. Rather than being ashamed or apologetic about it, as many women are, I can be proud and see it as a privilege.
Those who, like me, refuse to accept the crazy, unsubstantiated theory of the gay gene and innate sexual orientation are accused, by other gays, of playing into the hands of the enemy. When the actor Cynthia Nixon said to a journalist at the New York Times Magazine that she “chose” to be a lesbian following a perfectly happy heterosexual past, she was vilified and bullied into apologising. A few weeks later, she withdrew her comment and said she must have been born with “bisexual potential.”
At the same time, we cannot ignore the social pressures on bi people, both from gay and straight people, to "choose a side" and simply identify as straight or gay/lesbian depending on the relationship they're currently in. People should be free to claim bisexuality if this is how they feel.
Later still, Nixon hit back against her critics, saying: “Why can’t it be a choice? Why is that any less legitimate? It seems we’re just ceding this point to bigots who are demanding it, and I don’t think that they should define the terms of the debate.”
When lesbians are bullied into believing that our sexuality is written in the genes, it results in a distinct lack of pride. In many ways, it doesn't matter why a minority of women are exclusively same-sex attracted, and our rights should never be defined by whatever people decide or believe on this matter. The truth is, whether we like it or not, lesbians have been at the forefront of the LGBT rights movement in countries around the world, and we have always punched above our weight when it comes to fighting and campaigning for the liberation of all women. I think our track record is something to be tremendously proud of.
Julie Bindel is the author of Lesbians: Where Are We Now? (2025)
Published June 15, 2025
Published in Issue XIII: Heretic
