Answered Nov 25
This question or debate is often misguided on both sides.
It is based on the general idea that, something is legitimate if it is forced upon you. And isn’t legitimate if you made a choice.
If a 40-year-old woman doesn’t have any children, it is much more socially acceptable for her to be “suffering” from infertility, compared to being childfree by choice.
There is strong social pressure for an adult woman to psychologically cling to her mother, regardless of how toxic and abusive, and to surrender to a sense of a forced relationship. If she chooses to cut the umbilical cord, she will be socially abused.
There is a common assumption that, a person is somehow assigned to a geographic location as a child, and that, they “have to” live there for their entire life. There will be social condescension (and even open hostility) if she asserts her right/ability to choose her location as an adult. Especially if she reserves the right to do so again in the future.
Women who feel trapped and restricted in a financially/practically/emotionally dependent marriage will resent a single woman makes her own choices without needing to ask a husband.
Someone who feels trapped in a job may claim that, someone who chooses to put forth extra effort and progresses to a better job is “unstable”.
Religious people may enjoy the idea of a fixed set of rules that everyone “must” obey, because their God is about universal “thou shalt not”, rather than giving individual choices.
Some people resent their own physical bodies, but feel trapped, and will deride/resent anyone who chooses to take the effort for physical self-control.
There are various LifeScript(TM) issues, where many many people assume, “this is how everyone’s life is arranged and proceeds”. They will become confused and derisive towards someone who chooses to diverge from that script.
There is social pressure to “settle down”. Which means to bring your life story to a complete halt, and never make any personal choices ever again.
So, the application to LGBTQWhatever folks is the idea that, such designations are legitimised if the person was forced into it by biology (the “born that way” argument). And that, social tolerance/acceptance is owed to these passive victims. While ignoring the fact that, engaging in physical homosexual acts is a choice.
It feeds into the general idea that, being forced into something is legitimate, and should be tolerated, while making your own choices isn’t legitimate, and perhaps should be punished or suppressed.
And let’s not forget the way that, some of the Ls and Gs get negative attitudes towards the Bs and Ts for allegedly having choices, and thus being less legitimate.