By: Loren Krywanczyk

You have undoubtedly heard numerous arguments lately for equal rights, like gay marriage rights and gay adoption rights, for queer individuals (gay men, lesbians, bisexual, transgendered, and questioning persons, to name a few). Some of these arguments work to try to convince you that homosexuals are “just like heterosexuals.” In making points like these, gay rights supporters maneuver within a heteronormative society, one in which heterosexuality is the norm and all other sexualities must be expressed in heterosexual terms in order to be accepted or understood. Heteronormativity is not the same as heterosexuality – the negative implications of heteronormativity hinge on the “othering” and marginalization of all sexual “deviants,” those not perceived as “normal” or heterosexual. Heteronormativity, though difficult to define, assumes the heterosexual partnerships as natural. This assumption is often accompanied by the enforcement of rigid codes of masculinity and femininity. The oppression of individuals with non-normative sexualities is undeniably a result of pervasive heteronormativity. Moreover, there is an insufficient regard for the suffocating pressures heteronormativity exerts on all members of American society, regardless of specific sexual orientation or identity.

To assume a feminist perspective, it is immediately evident that heteronormativity threatens the freedom of all women. History is rich with examples of compulsory heterosexuality imposed upon women, sometimes masked by the illusion of choice, in order to perpetuate male dominance. Historically, and arguably presently in some contexts, marriage has represented a violent wrenching of a young woman from her emotional (and sometimes erotic) female bonds, and her abandonment into a world of subservience devoid of what feminist scholar Adrienne Rich terms “woman-identified values”. Current society continues to discourage female-female bonds and to instill in women a fear of failure to fit a standard of behavior that appeals to men. As Rich writes, “The ideology of heterosexual romance, beamed at [a woman] from childhood out of fairy tales, television, films, advertising, popular songs, wedding pageantry, is a tool ready to the procurer’s hand and one which he does not hesitate to use”. Individual women’s sexualities aside, heteronormativity continues to function hegemonically and at the expense of female empowerment.

Also, due to the social construction of behavioral codes based upon sex and gender, heteronormativity compels all individuals to behave in specific manners, which supposedly correspond to their sex, gender, and sexuality. The maintenance of stereotypes of masculinity and femininity, which strictly limit individuals, is bolstered by heteronormativity. Unless a woman is properly feminine, a trait which in America frequently involves materialism, ditziness, physical weakness, and superficiality, she can find herself accused of mannishness (a la Serena Williams with her “extreme” musculature) or of lesbianism – an accusation which condemns lesbianism as something a “normal girl” avoids. Similarly, self-identified heterosexual men are pressured to conform to standards of masculinity which can demand the repression of personality traits like kindness, sensitivity, good personal hygiene, or a passion for interior design, a decidedly “gay” characteristic that television shows like “Queer Eye for the Straight Guy” teach us to view as such. And, as the recently-released film Sideways confirms, a truly heterosexual man is expected to arrogantly brag about “f–king a chick,” (or be er, many chicks) or else he runs the risk of being labeled (gasp!) gay. In these ways, heteronormativity restricts our lives and personalities, pressuring us into constructed categories and behaviors. And, one must ask, for whose benefit?

Heteronormativity, almost needless to say, is oppressive to queer people. Queer people are indeed, people too. Homosexuality is arguably not a choice. And there is recognizable value, for the queer community, in combating homophobia, sometimes through efforts to uncover the homosexual identities of prominent historical figures such as Abraham Lincoln (surprise!). I embrace the future expansion of the dialogue about heteronormativity and issues like gay marriage and gay adoption rights. But I want to push the conversation beyond the queer community. Retaliating against heteronormativity by naturalizing or normalizing homosexuality would fail to get at the root of the problem. Homonormativity would be as oppressive as heteronormativity, with parallel repercussions, and would merely reverse the directly oppressed identities. Normativity, in this case heteronormativity, negatively affects everybody.

del.icio.us! | Share on Facebook

See Also:

No related posts

<-->

This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 3rd, 2007 at 2:16 am and is filed under Lifestyle, Voices. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.