Yeah, that last question was a kicker. But what's worse? Nixon's freakin' answer.

The response her partner gave over the cowboy boots makes me think she is kind of a jerk.

Yes, this is so annoying. Interviews look just like this for any newly out celebrity or even a straight actress who has an upcoming role playing gay. Are interviewers and journalists really so stupid that they are this perplexed by queer relationships and they have to ask these questions? Do they really think their questions will uncover some new detail or insight into the non-straight world? Journalists and their audiences can't really be so ignorant that these questions are still intriguing or relevant, right?

I honestly begin to think these questions are just part of a mandatory othering of queer actresses. Like we just have to quickly go through this list to make sure it's established to everyone reading we don't think the non-straight ways of this actress are normal enough to not mention...

adminassistant, Solomon edits and organizes these interviews, so it's quite possible that wasn't Nixon's full answer, etc. Just a thought.

"Do you think of her as the male figure in the relationship?"

The fooking hell! Offensive much?

I'll make sure the next time I'm interviewing a straight person that I ask "who wears the pants" in the relationship. >

as a queer woman who's female partner is more masculine-identified than otherwise I can say that people sincerely do not know about this stuff. It's infuriating, yes - but people of older generations, and less liberal people our own age, and republicans, and people who don't know any gay people are really confused by this stuff.

They're bewildered and its infuriating and the example Cynthia gives about how she's not 'the man' is something that people who wonder this might actually get. For people in their infancy of understanding queer culture and people these explanations are a stepping stone. Infuriating, yes - but not everyone is the progressive, enlightened people we are ;)

Heh, did anyone else read Nixon's answers and think in a little sing-song voice: awk-ward...

I find the last question very irritating. It implies that in a gay relationship, one person must be the "man" and the other the "woman" - that a gay relationship is really a straight relationship.

It's a standard that's applied to straight relationships too - for instance, many people might consider my father the "woman" in his marriage because he does all the cooking and my mother the "man" because she takes care of their car and issues to do with the plumbing, heating, etc. of the house.

Stereotypes pertaining to manhood and womanhood are equally damaging to both straight and gay couples, in my opinion.

Absolutely possible for sure. But, "she's with the kids" suggests that a not "male figure in the relationship" is the one who should be caring for the kids, and I'm confused by the who votes for whom thing, since I thought voting based on gender (or gender identity) was wrong. But if Solomon just made up or adjusted the heck out of the responses, then I stand corrected.

Yes! I yelled at the magazine when I read it! These columns are reliably button-pushing, shallow, and all-around terrible, so I wasn't surprised, but I was certainly offended anyway. Clearly, when a high-profile woman gets involved with a woman, the nitty-gritty of their relationship claws its way to the top of the list of prurient celebrijournalism topics to ask about.

I'm in medical school, and I was in a long human sexuality seminar yesterday designed to educate us about gay and trans people - and you wouldn't believe ths dumb stuff people asked our very cooperative tokenite panelists, as if all this time they'd just been dying to ask a gay couple just how hard things are for them in the world. Get yourself educated...don't force people to be mascots.

Stereotypes pertaining to manhood and womanhood are equally damaging to both straight and gay couples, in my opinion, and they are the root of 100% of the world’s sexism, which includes all manner of homo, hetero, and transphobias.

Agreeing with MadelineB, and expanding a bit.

That interview really REALLY pissed me off.

And people wonder why non-heteros who are in the public eye choose to remain closeted.

The tone of the article is kind of like the author has just found out about lesbians. You mean, there are women who have relationships with women? You mean, they live together and everything? WOW!

The male figure question reminded me of that scene in Kissing Jessica Stein:

Wedding guest: So which one of you is the man?

Helen: Neither, we're both...women...

People aren't smart.

I'm in medical school, and I was in a long human sexuality seminar yesterday designed to educate us about gay and trans people - and you wouldn't believe ths dumb stuff people asked our very cooperative tokenite panelists, as if all this time they'd just been dying to ask a gay couple just how hard things are for them in the world. Get yourself educated...don't force people to be mascots.

Please don't tell me that you just told people to get educated and then showed contempt when people asked "dumb stuff" in medical school. I would think that a seminar would be the *perfect* place to ask these questions.

I'm sorry, but if someone willingly puts themselves up for answering questions about being gay then there is no such thing as a dumb question.

Also, what's with the bisexual erasure in the title of the post? Cynthia Nixon has never identified as a lesbian (or bisexual) and she's quoted as saying:

“In terms of my sexual orientation, I don't really feel that I changed," she says. "I don't feel any different than I did before. I don't feel like there was some hidden part of myself that I wasn't aware of. I had been with men all my life and I had never met a woman I had fallen in love with before. But when I did it didn't seem so strange. I don't define myself. I'm just a woman in love with another woman."

Off topic, but there is more than one way to define women who love women (lesbian, bisexual, queer, etc) and as a bi woman I'd like to see that reflected in GLBT posts. :)

Right Xana. I'm all about queer inclusivity. But in Jessica's defense, I'm pretty sure the title of the post was supposed to parrott Solomon's mindset when going into the interview. It's pretty crude, just like Solomon's thinking must've been when she decided to make this interview about asking ridiculous questions about how same-sex relationships "work." Based on Solomon's questions, I have a feeling she isn't completely cognizant of gender and sexuality dynamics outside a strictly gay-straight dichotomy...

Thanks Commodore08, that was in fact the intent. Xana, sorry I didn't make it clearer that I was mocking Solomon...

>>>>I'm in medical school, and I was in a long human sexuality seminar yesterday designed to educate us about gay and trans people - and you wouldn't believe ths dumb stuff people asked our very cooperative tokenite panelists, as if all this time they'd just been dying to ask a gay couple just how hard things are for them in the world. Get yourself educated...don't force people to be mascots.

I'm confused too. How are people who haven't had much exposure to gay couples supposed to get themselves educated if they can't ask questions, some of which might seem dumb to more aware people like yourself?

Lots of people grow up in this world with limited exposure to anything but hetero culture. I think it's great that your school is having this kind of seminar, so that med students can ask these "dumb" questions in a safe setting, rather than letting them unintentionally offend a real patient.

I understand that she was mocking Solomon (duh!), and thanks for clarifying Jessica, but I still wanted to make a point about bisexual erasure in the media and how certain words and phrases render us invisible.

I'll get back on topic now. :)

"Do you think of her as the male figure in the relationship?"

There needs to be a device that automatically SMACKS people who ask this question.

I can just see myself answering the question very slowly, as follows: "No man in relationship. Me woman. Her woman. That's the fucking point!"

Oddly enough, I actually have seen Cynthia Nixon and her partner together in a social setting- they were at a small community celebration that I also attended. The questions that were asked (whispered really) at the event about them were not about the relationship she had with her partner, rather, everyone was more concerned with how to treat the couple and their children with respect and due privacy due to their celebrity states. So, I'm appalled that this reporter thought it was fair game to pull out UNEDUCATED and STEREOTYPICALLY driven questions about the relationship that Cythnica has. I mean, if a bunch of country clubbing rich people don't find it necessary to marvel at a lesbian relationship, you'd think the NYT could restrain itself. Not only is it offensive, its stupid. Lesbian couples have relationships, if you'd like to ask about their relationship, ask about IT, not about the "oddity" or "difference" in lesbian relationships. They're not a representation for every lesbian relationship out there. Straight couples don't have to explain the nature of their relationship based on stereotypes as bad as this. So, this reporter did mess up. Yeah, its a lesbian couple. Get a grip and respect them as a couple not as a freak show to be examined.

Regardless of how offensive this article is...it's also just a really horrible interview. All of the questions are both boring and obviously awkward for Nixon.

When she asks the question about them having more in common and then says the thing about the bathroom, I just have this image of her twirling her hair and smacking gum....anyone else get that?

I've always hated those Solomon interviews. Maybe it's just the way they're edited, but they always some off as so awkward--the questions are blunt and rude (and occasionally condescending, depending on the interviewee), and the answers seem tense, curt, and equally rude. I'm sure it's supposed to be come off as bitchy and urbane and fabulous, but to my eye, the column is mean, petty, and dumb. I have a hard time taking it seriously.

Re: amanda's comments. I live in a very small, conservative town (only one month until I move, finally!). When I first moved here, I could not believe the things people said about anyone who wasn't straight, white, Christian, etc. After awhile, I realized that the entire community is straight, white, and Christian. It's harder to understand being gay if you've literally never met an out gay person. It means your perspective is full of television and movie stereotypes and articles like this one. The questions seem really dumb, but it's more a question of a lack of exposure. That's the point of asking questions.

I agree with most of the people on here, except that I don't think Deborah Solomon is ignorant of the issues at all. If you read her column every week, she purposely asks very pointed, blunt (some might say "obnoxious") questions to every person she interviews. While her questions definitely have an irritating "Ask A Lesbian" slant, I think she was probably trying to get a rise out of Cynthia Nixon, who didn't really fight back much. (And sort of just reaffirmed stereotypes with her comment that her partner can't be the 'man' because she's home with the kids!)

However, there's no real way to tell, since DS edits and condenses the interviews to make them punchier.

I can think of only two good things that come out of this interview.

1. It is good evidence of how pervasive heteronormality is in our society when a person just being a lesbian is reason enough for an interview.

2. It never occured to me before, but I guess a homosexual couple CAN use the same washroom. It's never going to affect me in any way, but that has got to make life easier when your in one of those badly designed restaurants or theaters where the different bathrooms are on opposite ends of the place, and you and your significant other waste ten minutes trying to find one other so you can leave.
(I'm looking at YOU, theater complex just up the way)

That last question is rather irritating, but not all gay couples are offended by such questions. I'm friends with a lesbian couple and they openly refer to each other as the "man" or the "woman" in the relationship. It actually kind of bugs me that they are so willing to perpetuate gender stereotypes, but that's their choice and I would feel like I was being rude if I asked them why they did that. As long as they're comfortable with who they are, that's what matters.

Omg, that's so ingenuous, wide-eyed and giggly, I think I'm gonna go barf.

Hi! We have, these, like, great gender roles? And we'd like to squash you in them? And maybe ask leading questions so we get the answers that suit us best? Awesome!

That last question is rather irritating, but not all gay couples are offended by such questions.

I'm sure that there are gay and lesbian couples that aren't offended by it, but it still pisses me off when people just assume that there's a "man" in the relationship.

Come on, this is a little silly. Of course it's interesting that she's a lesbian. Most people don't know any lesbians. Why shouldn't she be asked questions about it?

Because the only difference between a lesbian woman and a straight woman, is that the the lesbian is sexually attracted to the female form, as opposed to the male form.

The questions were childishly ignorant.

I think the questions were meant to be interesting and fun, which they were.

Of course there are differences between lesbians and straight women. You don't get many lesbians voting Republican, for a start

Womble: Are you serious?

The questions are annoying, but I'm not sure Cynthia's answers are unless you take them at absolute face value. Generally it's not a good idea to slap your interviewer across the face and read them the riot act on gender roles. It seems to me that her answer about "pounding the pavement" might be a tongue in cheek way to show how dumb the question was.

I actually smiled when I read the interview because Solomon starts off assuming that an attractive, feminine woman like Nixon would be in a relationship with another feminine woman, who share clothes and go the the bathroom together to fix their makeup. I know that's some people's reality but it's not Nixon's and it's not mine. I don't to put labels on people, but it sounds like a butch-femme relationship to me, and there's nothing wrong with that.

It's amazing how ignorant people still are about queer people and their relationships. Recently, I (a bi woman) was saying something to my boyfriend about a gay friend of mine and his boyfriend, and my boyfriend's roommate says, "He's gay? You know that means he just wants to have a pussy, right?" No, sweetheart, it means he's attracted to men. He's gay, not trans. This article comes from the same school of thought, that all relationships are either heterosexual or aping heterosexuality in some way. What's amazing is how prevalent it is.

This is the bit I don't get. If it's OK to say a lesbian relationship is 'butch-femme', then why is it not OK to ask who the male figure is?

Obviously the butch figure is the male figure. Obviously the femme figure is the feminine, female figure.

Where's the beef?

Obviously the butch figure is the male figure. Obviously the femme figure is the feminine, female figure.

A. Not all lesbian relationships are butch-femme. There are plenty of butch-butch and femme-femme relationships out there.

B. Being butch in a butch-femme relationship doesn't make you the "male" figure. Cynthia herself pointed out in response to that inane question that despite the more masculine gender expression of her partner, that did not equal a male/female-type role division.

Jordan, kat, Jessica F. -

I was commenting on the fly and I should have clarified...

Having the seminar and asking questions - fine by me. Some of the dumb stuff was the fault of the way the day was set up - not giving people some basic primers before setting them loose on panelists. Some of the dumb stuff was not *what* people asked, but the way in which they asked it. There is, of course, a huge difference between a basic but respectful question, and a question that is judgmental or obtrusive.

Sure, the panelists signed up for this. Asking them a question is not the same as asking someone you just met, "Oh, you're gay? Tell me, I've always wanted to know..." But that doesn't give you free reign to be offensive.

When I said, "get yourselves educated," I didn't mean, "make a sexuality seminar obsolete for all." What I really meant was, it might be wise to go gently into an area where you don't know much. I mean, know enough to not, say, speak in a pitying, condescending tone. I mean, not asking leading questions that show off your preconceived notions. We had a fair number of very closed-ended questions where the askers seemed to want their suspicions confirmed, rather than truly wanting to know the answer. That's really where I saw the parallel between Solomon's dumbass article and some of the stupid panel questions - NOT seeking knowledge, just reassurance that their cloistered misconceptions were quite on target.

I was concerned when they appeared on Oprah and she seemed to focus on that too... So I wondered if other interviews would focus on being a lesbian ... it seems my fears have come true ...