The media attention resulted in a new, open discourse about sexual fluidity and whether or not sexual orientation can change, with some of the media expressing disapproval toward heterosexual women stating that they would "go gay for Ruby Rose. " Teitel wrote that many on Twitter expressed skepticism that all it takes is a pretty face to change sexual orientation, and this was accompanied by the argument that saying "you [can] 'go gay' for Ruby Rose reinforces the idea that sexuality is a choice, and is homophobic. " She felt that it was predictable and ironic that the people most eager to admonish others for expressing their attraction to Rose were a part of the LGBT community, and cited a Jezebel article which commented that homosexuality and bisexuality are not simply identities to show off liberalism, but are rather "built into a person's biology. " To Teitel, this response suggested that "one must either reject the norm (heterosexuality) or embrace it full force. " She felt the discussion was a wasted opportunity for sexual exploration, which she believes is "a lot less daunting when labels are malleable," and emphasized the idea of "letting everyone define their sexuality on their own terms. "