blueyedpoet
Refugee
I'm taking a LGBT lit studies class right now, and recently we discussed heteronormativity. As a brief explanation I've copied part of wikipedia.com's explanation.
My question is this: If heterosexuality is so normal - natural - why does society feel the urge to enforce it? Why would we need to ban gay marriage if only heterosexuality is natural? Sometimes, our society enforces heterosexuality violently (ie. gay club raids prior to Stonewall, Stonewall itself, events like the slaying of Matthew Shepard etc).
The term was coined by Michael Warner in 1991 in his Social Text article, "Introduction: Fear of a Queer Planet" (Social Text, 1991; 9 (4 [29]): 3-17.), one of the first major works of queer theory. The concept can probably be traced back to the work of Adrienne Rich and her notion of compulsory heterosexuality. In a series of recent articles Samuel A. Chambers has tried to theorize heteronormativity more explicitly, calling for an understanding of heteronormativity as a concept that reveals the expectations, demands, and constraints produced when heterosexuality is taken as normative within a society.
It has been used in the exploration and critique of the traditional norms of sex, gender identity, gender roles and sexuality, and of the social implications of those institutions. It is descriptive of a dichotomous system of categorization that directly links social behavior and self-identity with one's genitalia. That is to say (among other things) that, because there are strictly defined concepts of maleness and femaleness, there are similarly expected behaviors for both males and females.
Originally conceived to describe the norms against which non-heterosexuals struggle, it quickly became incorporated into both the gender and the transgender debate. It is also often used in postmodernist and feminist debates. Those who use this concept frequently point to the difficulty posed to those who hold a dichotomous view of sexuality by the presence of clear exceptions — from freemartins in the bovine world to intersexual human beings with the sexual characteristics of both sexes. These exceptions are taken as direct evidence that neither sex nor gender are concepts that can be reduced to an either/or proposition.
In a heteronormative society, the binary choice of male and female for one's gender identity is viewed as leading to a lack of possible choice about one's gender role and sexual identity. Also, included in the norms established by society for both genders is the requirement that the individuals should feel and express desire only for partners of the opposite sex. In the work of Eve Sedgwick, for example, this heteronormative pairing is viewed as defining sexual orientation exclusively in terms of the sex and gender of the person one chooses to have sex with, ignoring other preferences one might have about sex.
In a heteronormative society, men and women are interpreted to be natural complements, socially as well as biologically, and especially when it comes to reproduction. Woman and men are necessary for procreation, therefore male/female coupling is assumed to be the norm.
My question is this: If heterosexuality is so normal - natural - why does society feel the urge to enforce it? Why would we need to ban gay marriage if only heterosexuality is natural? Sometimes, our society enforces heterosexuality violently (ie. gay club raids prior to Stonewall, Stonewall itself, events like the slaying of Matthew Shepard etc).
The term was coined by Michael Warner in 1991 in his Social Text article, "Introduction: Fear of a Queer Planet" (Social Text, 1991; 9 (4 [29]): 3-17.), one of the first major works of queer theory. The concept can probably be traced back to the work of Adrienne Rich and her notion of compulsory heterosexuality. In a series of recent articles Samuel A. Chambers has tried to theorize heteronormativity more explicitly, calling for an understanding of heteronormativity as a concept that reveals the expectations, demands, and constraints produced when heterosexuality is taken as normative within a society.
It has been used in the exploration and critique of the traditional norms of sex, gender identity, gender roles and sexuality, and of the social implications of those institutions. It is descriptive of a dichotomous system of categorization that directly links social behavior and self-identity with one's genitalia. That is to say (among other things) that, because there are strictly defined concepts of maleness and femaleness, there are similarly expected behaviors for both males and females.
Originally conceived to describe the norms against which non-heterosexuals struggle, it quickly became incorporated into both the gender and the transgender debate. It is also often used in postmodernist and feminist debates. Those who use this concept frequently point to the difficulty posed to those who hold a dichotomous view of sexuality by the presence of clear exceptions — from freemartins in the bovine world to intersexual human beings with the sexual characteristics of both sexes. These exceptions are taken as direct evidence that neither sex nor gender are concepts that can be reduced to an either/or proposition.
In a heteronormative society, the binary choice of male and female for one's gender identity is viewed as leading to a lack of possible choice about one's gender role and sexual identity. Also, included in the norms established by society for both genders is the requirement that the individuals should feel and express desire only for partners of the opposite sex. In the work of Eve Sedgwick, for example, this heteronormative pairing is viewed as defining sexual orientation exclusively in terms of the sex and gender of the person one chooses to have sex with, ignoring other preferences one might have about sex.
In a heteronormative society, men and women are interpreted to be natural complements, socially as well as biologically, and especially when it comes to reproduction. Woman and men are necessary for procreation, therefore male/female coupling is assumed to be the norm.
