If a cab driver asks me how my day was, and i'm exhausted, I say "good" and stop talking. This is true whether you are gay, straight, or whatever.
In the example in the article, if he was too exhausted to tell "the truth" (as he calls it) and have a "transformative conversation", he should have just said "i'd rather not talk about it". This does not require denying anything, pretending about anything, etc. It's unlikely the cab driver cared either way, to be honest, and if you give them the hint that you'd rather just drive in silence than spend your energy , they will.
Again, it just seems the author acts as if he has to educate everyone, and it's a laborious process. I agree there are plenty of cases he needs to educate people, and that is laborious. But I think it goes too far when he gets into the realm of people just trying to make small talk, who actually don't care one way or the other.
The cabby is likely just trying to stave off boredom and get a good tip, not an ignorant person whose mental state about the world needs to change. In all likelihood, he's probably playing a probability game (IE i'm sure he asks young drunk looking college kids about women or partying, forlorn looking businessmen about where they are traveling from, etc). You can see this as offensive if you like, but it's really not about ignorance.
As the parent said, small talk is small talk.
Otherwise, they have exactly the problem you mention in the last sentence. They see people from all walks of life. If they didn't make some set of assumptions (be it about sexuality, gender, typical behavior of males, typical behavior of females), they'd never be able to engage in any small talk, lest they offend someone's sensibilities.
As I said, you may find this offensive, but it's not about ignorance.
It's the same problem with the people that say "Oh, women at conferences should be flattered by the attention". They want to be seen as equal. I want to be seen as equal. Having to stop and explain, "No, I don't have a wife" is a reminder of the fact that most of our society still walks around assuming every stranger is straight.
I can imagine that regularly responding with "I'd rather not talk about it" when people make basic, friendly conversation is not a pleasant option. And it really doesn't seem the same as saying "good" when someone asks me how my day is.
Just substitute internet for real life.
There is a time and place for everything.
By responding to, "How's your wife?" with "My husband's fine," he's admitting homosexuality to a potential homophobe. You could lie and say, "She's fine," and that'd be that. You could be neutral and say, "Fine," but that just postpones it. And for some people, they're aware that's a deliberate skirting of the issue and is basically a lie by omission. That atrophies the very muscle the author wanted to discuss. You might find it acceptable, but it's clear that the author does not.
Your sexuality informs and alters 100% of your life.
No it doesn't. And choice exists in almost everything.
The stakes: one upvote.
Can I have my upvote?
The scientific evidence is not on your side, if you're interested in that sort of thing.
The choice is in your actions, not your feelings.
Unfortunately that's a difficult topic to avoid since we can hardly start referring to our partners as 'it' when the topic comes up.
Choosing to answer vaguely and switch the topic is the easiest way for gay people to get out of these issues, but it is also how you end up staying in the closet to a lot of people.
This article talks about choosing, in those situations, to not closet yourself and let the conversation flow as though the sex of your partner were a normal thing, knowing full well that it isn't for many people.
Hence the circle. By pointing out that I'm gay, when NO ONE (literally, I mean no one, most people don't believe me) expects it, I break that assumption and cause that person to second guess that assumption in the future.
Asking someone to be private about who they're partners with is very discriminatory. It's not required of opposite-sex couples. And very simple freedoms you might take for granted, like holding your partners hand in public, or engaging in simple discussions, can be a battle sometimes. Compare to mixed race relationships in US history and the present day.
It's no more fair and civilized to suggest a 'don't ask don't tell' on same-sex partners than any other type of partnership. And comparing same sex attraction to a sexual fetish is frankly insulting.
You misunderstand the idea of "it's no one else's business" with "you must be silent!" Holding your partner's hand in public is already publicly declaring the very thing that would alter the direction of a conversation regarding the sex of your significant other, which has no bearing on the original post or my response. This is about feeling the need to actively correct the incorrect assumptions of people who have no meaningful value to you and your partner's life.
As for suggesting DADT, well when I suggest such a thing feel free to argue against it.
There are plenty of other reasons you might have kids but not a wife. Maybe you're a widower. Maybe they're actually your brother's kids, but he and his wife were killed by a drunk driver, and you're the godfather.
Perfectly legitimate cases where you just have no reason to get into it with the freaking cab driver, and probably don't get into a serious conversation, and probably also don't tell him to mind his own damn business.
Wouldn't it also be inappropriate for the cab-driver to follow up, "Do you have kids?" with the question "Are they biologically yours?"
You're also operating under the presumption that a same-sex partnership should be something hidden, or that it should be a touchy topic and only brought up sparingly, when frankly that's oppressive and discriminatory.
Just because I'm gay doesn't mean that I go around proclaiming the fact to others unless it's relevant to the context of the conversation.