Love doesn’t need labelling
What if human attraction — both physical and emotional — is ever-changing, and dependent on a range of factors?
The obsession with former Bachelor Australia contestants Tiffany Scanlon and Megan Marx’s relationship is an opportunity for all of us to reflect on the biases and prejudices we hold about sexuality.
National Coming Out Day was recently celebrated on October 11 (and before certain predictable folks say it, yes there is a holiday for almost everything, and yes, you are cordially invited to my Bean Day festivities in January).
Social media was lit up with people sharing their ‘coming out’ stories, with many also using the opportunity to share their gender or sexual identity with their peers.
My own coming out was complicated: after a few long-term relationships with men, when I was 23 I realised that I’d also always been attracted to women.
After having an experience that confirmed this for me, I nervously blurted out, “I think I’m gay”, to my oldest friend and promptly ran down the street.
My friend was far from homophobic, but the words were suddenly out there, and I felt exposed.
So now I was gay, but used to be straight … or maybe the term is bisexual? I had found something within myself, but was unsure of exactly how to name it.
But then maybe it isn’t necessary to label every experience and feeling; instead we should just enjoy it.
Megan and Tiffany: Aren’t they both straight?
Former Bachelor Australia contestants Megan Marx and Tiffany Scanlon have caused a mild media storm after revealing they are together and in love.
Marx earlier this week described their relationship in an Instagram post — ostensibly to wish Scanlon a happy 30th birthday — as a friendship that had “ripened into something bolder”.
Scanlon followed up with a post in which she said: “Meeting Megan this year felt like destiny.”
This was not news to those who had been keeping an eye on their Instagram accounts (ahem, anyone else?), where both women have been posting regular photos of each other along with doting captions since being eliminated from The Bachelor.
But the media’s obsession with their relationship — are they together, aren’t they? — has sparked speculation around their sexual identities.
Radio presenters have joked the Bachelor, Richie, turned them gay. Folks on social media have questioned the validity of their relationship, openly asking Marx and Scanlon: “Aren’t you both straight?”
We live in an age of carefully constructed social media accounts and reality TV shows that make us question just how ‘real’ these people actually are, so it’s natural to have questions.
Two beautiful women went on a reality dating show to ‘find love’ with a man, and have seemingly since fallen in love with each other. It sounds like a fairytale, or even a fantasy.
Regardless, it is worth asking why these questions are being raised, and maybe even taking the opportunity they present to reflect on our own biases and prejudices when it comes to sexuality.
Is it because we are oversaturated with reality stars and have naturally developed cynicism around the industry? Is it because we don’t believe bisexual people exist?
It is because they are both feminine women — and if so, what does that say about our unconscious assumptions about queer women?
Despite how Scanlon and Marx choose to identify, the public’s attitudes to their relationship are indicative of a wider issue of bi-erasure — the notion that bisexuality essentially isn’t real.
This is continually present in pop culture and media, which tends to present human sexuality as a binary of gay/straight.
Let’s talk about bi-erasure
Bi-erasure has been shown to be present in Australian education policies around LGBTQ identities, and studies have found bisexual women have poorer mental health outcomes than lesbians.
(Researchers have suggested this may be linked to their reluctance to disclose their sexual identity; concealing sexual orientation has previously been associated with poorer mental health).
Some folk also identify as pansexual, demisexual or even sexually fluid — terms which have become increasingly common in recent years, but which have unfortunately also been mocked and criticised by people who are apparently uncomfortable with the growing number of letters in the LGBTQI acronym.
You can scoff and dismiss these people’s lived experiences if that’s how you get your kicks (but maybe consider taking up a hobby?), but the fact is 1 in 2 young people now identify as “not heterosexual”.
At this point, the topic of sexual fluidity is inevitably raised — and no, the term doesn’t refer to the various flavoured lubricants stocked at your local ‘lifestyle’ store.
What if human attraction — both physical and emotional — is ever-changing, and dependent on a range of factors?
The pressure to ‘choose a team’
In an essay for ABC News earlier this year, Lily Edelstein, who at age 12 realised her sexuality “existed somewhere within the wibbly-wobbly world of ‘not straight’”, wrote that sexual fluidity by its nature defies definition.
“[It is] the acknowledgement that attraction and desire is organic, unpredictable and something that grows with a person, not something they commit to outright,” Edelstein said.
My own experience is very similar, and perhaps some of you are nodding your heads vigorously in the same way I did reading Edelstein’s words. (Careful, you might pull a muscle.)
For me, attraction to another person is nuanced and complex, and often unpredictable. In fact, evidence suggests that women and young people are more likely to identify as sexually fluid than any other demographic.
For me, the theory of fluidity is completely apt.
Perhaps if I had been aware of this notion when I was younger, I would have felt more comfortable exploring these feelings without feeling the pressure to choose a ‘team’.
Perhaps I wouldn’t have fled down the street that day had I been aware that my sexuality wasn’t so black and white.
It is unclear at this point exactly how Megan Marx and Tiffany Scanlon identify and, ultimately, it’s none of our business. It’s beautiful seeing two people so happy together, regardless of circumstance.
But it’s important that we use the conversations being had about these women to reflect on our own biases, assumptions, and even to think about our own sexuality.
Labels can be incredibly helpful and empowering to some, sure. But let us also support those who choose to not wear one. Live and let love.
