People express homophobia in lots of interesting ways. There's the screaming you're-all-going-to-hell crowd, but they do us a favor by loudly advertising their ignorance. It's the subtle homophobes who sneak up on you and catch you off guard. It's the ones who don't even think they are homophobes, and you might even believe them until the day it slyly rolls out of their mouths. When the shock wears off, you're left to wonder if it was just you, or if your friend really did just put their foot in it.

That happened to my wife and I recently. We invited an old friend of my wife's over for dinner. I'll call her Ruth. She's the mother of some close friends, and my wife has known her for years. She lives far away and only visits once or twice a year, so dinner was an opportunity for Ruth to get to know me better, and vice versa.

Ruth's children and in-laws are very open and accepting about homosexuality. I had heard from everyone, including my wife, that Ruth was also quite liberal and had "known a lot of homosexuals" through her previous business of making costumes for the theater. She even sent us a wedding present.

But when she arrived for dinner, the atmosphere was a little strained, at least from my perspective. I was wondering when I'd be involved in Ruth's conversation. She had an astonishing lack of interest in the new wife of her old friend. But if that were the only issue to arise during the course of the evening, I wouldn't be writing this article.

While I was preparing dinner for the table, my wife happened to mention that I wouldn't be able to drink any of the wine that Ruth brought, because I'm trying to get pregnant and might already be. (We're using an anonymous sperm donor and a local reproductive clinic, where they do the inseminations.) Ruth's reaction to this happy news made my wife and I angry for several days.

Ruth had previously expressed concerns about our wanting a child in an email. At the time, we put it down to her being afraid that I would have a baby and then leave my wife in the lurch. She didn't know me, after all. But this time she expressed her "concerns" in a very forceful way that was intended to leave no room for argument: if we had a child "that way," then it would inevitably have "too many issues" (i.e., be "messed up"), so we should adopt instead.

Although angry that she brought this up again instead of wishing us luck, we tried to understand what her issue was. Wouldn't an adopted child have as many issues? It was a question of the child not knowing it's biology, she said. But, again, wouldn't an adopted child have those issues, only doubled? And what about kids of hetero couples whose dad split or died at an early age or even before birth? Or if the father was a one-night-stand and largely unknown? Were they all, because "father-less," condemned to be "messed up" as a matter of course?

I finally had to ask her why she and her recently deceased husband had three children themselves instead of adopting. She had no answer. She finally dropped it. But it was too late: we were fuming.

After a painful meal and some very light conversation, we took her back to her son's house and spent the rest of the night being angry and trying to figure out what had just happened.

So what did happen?

It was painfully obvious to us that, rather than being accepting of us as a couple, she was, in fact, very uncomfortable. We could've overlooked her discomfort. But the notion of us, as married lesbians, having children without a penis in the family was apparently more than she could bear. It may have been due partly to loyalty to her dead husband and his role in their family. But I think that it was due primarily to her inability to see beyond her boxes.

In Ruth's set of boxes, the only "right" way to be a family is to have a penis, a vagina, and a wedding vow. She's an old lady and very steeped in conservative tradition. But when you remove a penis—or, if you're a gay couple, the vagina—then you're not functioning in her box any more. And suddenly the world is uncontrollable and scary.

This is why the far right feels so threatened. It's not because of who we love. They've erased love from their equations. Love makes things even more confusing, because it's hard to have a problem with love. It's those safe, comfortable, non-threatening boxes they want. "If only everyone would stay in these little boxes, then I wouldn't have to grow," they lament, frightened.

We were outside of Ruth's comfy box. And the only way she could think of to deal with it is to tell us to adopt, although it made no sense whatsoever. What she was really trying to say is, "You're scaring me. I don't know what to think about my own life and who I am without this box. So stop doing this. Stop trying to make a family."

Ah, family.

The truth is, there has never been a single definition of a family. Oh, "Leave It To Beaver" may try to tell you otherwise, but that myth has never been reality. Sure, some kids have a mom and dad who never divorce. In some of those cases, they just remain committed in their misery until death do them part. No, the nuclear family doesn't have the sole magical formula for raising happy, healthy kids. Any psychologist will tell you that.

Families do change over time. Divorce happens. Sometimes Grandma or Grandpa has to help out. Sometimes one family has to live with another for awhile. Sometimes two families merge in a second marriage. Or a third. Sometimes we lose people, and a single parent has to do the best they can. Sometimes kids don't have parents at all, and they create a family with other kids. Sometimes as lonely adults, we create a family with other like-minded adults.

So, are the people from all of these different kinds of families, including the traditional nuclear family, "messed up"? Of course, to some degree or another. We're human beings. It's inevitable to have some issues, regardless of who raised us. That's part of our learning process.

Does love count for something when you're creating a family? Hell, yes.

So, how do we deal with Ruth's homophobia and insecurity? After being angry, we forgive her. This doesn't mean we'll be inviting her back for dinner. We're not gluttons for punishment. We already felt like a wolf in sheep's clothing had come into our home, and that's enough of that. But we can have compassion for her ignorance and empathy for her fear. Because her core issue isn't homophobia. Her core issue is that the boxes are disappearing.

The boxes are disappearing. That means that all of us are free to live in ways that make us happy, without boxes, without arbitrary rules. The boxes are disappearing. Personal freedom and power can be pretty darn scary. No wonder the country and the world is in chaos!

As we continue to walk a box-less path and take on our personal power, we will effect change. Heterosexuals are a part of this process, too, so don't count them out! Expect that fear will not rule the day, and it won't. Watch and see. In the meantime, you're not obligated to entertain homophobes for dinner, but you should try to have compassion for them. In the end, their struggle is harder than ours because we are already free.

From June 2005