Does Milk send some people into outer space?

I cannot say if the recent biopic is a fair depiction of Harvey Milk.

I am responding to the film, which I saw some time after its release.

It's not a mainly critique of the film itself but what is presented in the film.

Harvey is a hero for many gay people because he was the first to open doors to greater freedom and recondition for them. There was some attempt to say that Harvey fought for more than just homosexuals.

But my response was: he made an 'us and you' - an otherness that breeds discord.

If you bring a group together on the grounds of being oppressed, misunderstood, a minority - you make a faction.

Harvey also defined what gay is. Especially for men. It is a ghetto of a particular culture. But loving other men (or women) doesn’t make you a particular kind of person. It doesn't say how you dress or cut your hair, where you shop or eat. It doesn’t define your ethics or beliefs or relationship behaviours.

I know what it is to go to a group that is meant to be of your people - hoping for friendships and solidarity, and belonging where you have felt alien elsewhere. And what's hardest is feeling as much an alien among your own as with the rest of the world.

That was my feeling as I watched Milk - that he supposedly spoke up for me but he wasn't representing me at all, but rather adding to isolation and confusion.

I was angry at the scene where he dictated that all in his circle should come out, handing them the phone to tell their parents at that moment. It was an act of supreme arrogance and insensitivity. To come out (or tell any delicate news) to those who may find it hard needs careful thought and choosing of the right time. For some, it comes best in writing - not a late night impromptu call with your friends listening in. It was likely to be incredibly damaging.

Sexuality does not put people in boxes and it is NOT an identity. It does not say who you are - simply which sex(es) you are likely to love.

Sexuality is complex and personal, so the gay/straight/bi model is not suffice. And even accepting that, there is a type of sexuality that is not catered for in this film or in society: those who do not love romantically.

I have not chosen to call it Asexual - as if we must add sex to every kind of category; and it is ironic for those that do not operate in what is recognised as sexual… but what is that?

If sexuality is a continuum and a flux, there may be times where we feel attracted to different sexes, or none. Like the Ladies of Llangollen, we may have a romantic friendship, but not the partnership that is passionate.

Yet a non passionate or physical relationships is common, and perhaps today we feel a pressure to change or end those comfortable relationships which are not passionate. If we're younger, we feel especially that we shouldn’t settle with someone where that feeling has gone. But really the question should be: are we both OK with this, not is this normal or acceptable?

Perhaps some people seek life long friendship only.

I felt that Milk's world left no room for the friends-only people, those who aren’t overtly sexual and gay in his way of being and proclaiming.

The film skimmed the important role of the Mayor, whose tolerance and support was vital for Milk's success - and who also was assassinated. It didn't have the power I expected and nor did I particularly warm to any of the characters except Victor Garber's.

And I was left, not with gratitude and oneness but that Milk divided as much as he united and had made some of us feel greater aliens.