Stella Duffy describes the symptoms, but misses the point
Personally, I cringe at the gay appellation used as a job description - "lesbian writer Stella Duffy". Not everything I write is about lesbians, and, far more importantly, I don't get paid for being a lesbian (though I reckon it could be an earner - I have been practicing for years). Being a lesbian is as important, and as unimportant, to me as the fact that I have red hair, have freckles or was brought up a Catholic. At home, in my daily life, it's intrinsic, and it's nothing.
Well, I do not know what
is important for her. Is it the color of her shoes? Is it the decoration of her apartment? The taste of her wine? Or simply the amount of money she earns the year? For Denneny's sake, what can be more important for your social life than the choice of your partner? Comparing sexual orientation with "hair color" is ridiculous - especially being brought up as a Catholic. Mind you, the Bible prescribes death penalty for (male) homosexuals, and I hardly dare to believe that being different wasn't perceived by her as a dramatic experience.
Ms Duffy certainly would not object the job descriptions as "British writer Stella Duffy" or "English writer Stella Duffy", because they simply describe what she is. Why is she concerned thus by "lesbian writer Stella Duffy"? Not only is she a lesbian, but also has she written some clearly lesbian stuff.
No doubt, though Stella Duffy (with some degree of bitterness) recognizes that the straights by no way are going to oversee the differences between "them" and "us" any soon, she insists on the erroneous notion that there are indeed no real difference at all. Let's be said once and for all: the only way to fit perfectly into the straight mainstream is to become straight oneselfe. Hardly a desirable goal, for me.