Don’t we constantly hear that sexual orientation (and the associated sexual behavior) is an immutable quality and not a choice? If that is so, then explain this.

If the lipstick lesbian was the gay icon of the nineties, these days she’s been replaced by her more controversial counterpart, the hasbian: a woman who used to date women but now dates men. Though Anne Heche is the most prominent example, many hasbians (sometimes called LUGS: lesbians until graduation) are by-products of nineties liberal-arts educations. Caught up in the gay scene at school, they came out at 20 or 21 and now, five or ten years later, are finding themselves in the odd position of coming out all over again—as heterosexuals.

Some hasbians identify as bisexual, while others say they’re straight and describe their lesbianism as a meaningful but finite phase of their lives. . . .

Just a phase? Really? No wonder such women are considered such a threat by the gay community – their very existence undermines a major argument that is made to justify a host of legal and social changes. But if sexual orientation is fluid rather than hard-wired, doesn’t the main line of offense for gay rights activists weaken significantly as the issue becomes one of choice and conduct rather than immutable status?