Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Head Shop >

Heteronormacy don't live here anymore?

Haus about we all give each other a big lovely huggle?

09:20 / 15.04.02

I'm not going to link to the relevant thread, 'cos it isn't really about this and the sooner it and its clash of egos dies the better, but I was a bit surprised to read this:

That there is heteronormacy is a painful fallacy under which you foolishly labour.

And I was just wondering what people think? If I got this right, heteronormacy or heteronormativity is the set of values which police the way people behave, and say that behaving like a straight person is OK and not behaving like a straight person is not.

So, does this exist anymore, and what has replaced it if it hasn't?

09:36 / 15.04.02

That there is heteronormacy is a fallacy under which a vast majority of the population lives. Its rules are enforced by people who, for the most part, are not in the clear, Platonic boxes of 'straight male' and 'straight female' they try to enforce on themselves and others.

Heteronormacy is a self-perpetuating fiction. There is heteronormacy. It's just isn't actually the norm. People just behave as if it is, because that's what it tells them to do.

Scary, innit?

12:20 / 15.04.02

It is a fallacy to suggest there is a "normal behavior" for any group as large and diverse as "straight people", "straight males" or "straight females" (or for that matter "queer people", "queer males" or "queer females"). It is unhelpful to label or stereotype people by their sexuality, especially using such incredibly broad terms.

Have you ever considered that sexuality is a continuum, and that furthermore it may be considered to have more than one dimension (i.e. straight/not straight)? It would be sensible to avoid the terms "queer", "gay" and "straight" entirely - the categories are too vague.

There is such a wide range of human behaviors that heteronormacy must be a fallacy when used with such broad brushstrokes. It doesn't cause me any pain whether fallacious or not, however if you like your heteronormacy painful I can certainly arrange that.

12:22 / 15.04.02

Clarification request: Is the heteronormacy referred to in this thread concerning Barbelith in particular, or are we looking at a bigger picture?

03:08 / 16.04.02

Reading the initial post, it seems to me that "heteronormacy" attempts to describe the bigger picture. Unless a discussion is more strictly defined, I assume it has a global perspective.

But maybe that's just me.

09:36 / 16.04.02

It's always been bullshit. To talk about it as a construct that keeps gay people down misses how much tireless effort gay people have put into its existence. There's never been a clear movement to make the following abundently obvious:

(1) There is no biblical justification for fuckholing us over. If you want to be that way, let's circumcise all the kids, beat all our wives and bring back slavery, otherwise, don't pick and choose, that's probably not how God works.
(2) We are the same as you are: we get up, we shower, have breakfast, brush our teeth, go to work, come home and go to bed. The difference lies in the fact that we suck dick and eat carpet in inverse to you.
(3) Novelty value for gayness is dead.
(4) You know how we all spend our entire lives searching for pure, sweet, simple love? Well, I mean that, we all do. So, stop pretending we don't get it. Stop pretending we can't get it.
(4a) boy animals root each other, so it is natural. Ditto, girl animals.
(5) Stop pretending that gay people have to feel as dirty, shameful and self loathing as the rest of society. Stop pretending that sex is something bad.
(6) If you want to deny is basic human rights, like legally protected relationships, have a damn good reason. A big blue tenner is there for the taking if you can't find one. You won't. Stop it with bringing down the nature of marriage crap. The nature of your relationship is a private and not societal one, the nature of ours is too.
(7) We're allowed to do gay only things. There 's just some stuff that is best done by gay men among themselves.
(8) Our parades are cool, as are drag kings & queens, camp, butch, bears, etc, etc. There's nothing to be scared of.
(9) There is no reason why we need to aspire to be anything more than we are.
(10) I'm going to be one of the best parents ever. I won't hit my partner or swear at my kids, and yet I can't adopt. That's pretty fulla shit.

good.

09:38 / 16.04.02

by which I mean, gay people don't stand up for themselves very well. They have wheezy little protests, but it's time to just start saying "piss off" when people criticize us. Just say "look, this is us. See? It's not really worth the palava". We're not victims except of our own choosing.

09:39 / 16.04.02

shit. A big blue tenner, to the value of three pounds is there for the taking if you CAN find one. I'll stop posting now, I promise.

11:04 / 16.04.02

That there is heteronormacy is a painful phallocracy under which we all labour.

ONLY NICE THINGS

08:05 / 17.04.02

So, the scores on the doors so far seem to suggest that heteronormativity doesn't exist.

Except that it does, sort of, but it doesn't. Because it's just a thing that people feel like they ought to live by, and so many people do, even if it doesn't actually serve their interests to do so.

So, gay men and lesbians subscribe to the idea of heteronormativity (or, to encapsulate my understanding of Mikebro's post, they effectively endorse it by failing to refute its principles strongly enough). "Straight" people whose interests are not best served by it adopt, self-regulate according to and promulgate it, because they feel it is what they should be doing.

So, in what sense could it be said "no longer to exist", or for that matter "to exist"?

Aussie: For information's sake - the context was indeed the bigger picture. The proponent of the idea subsequently attempted to narrow the field to the Head Shop, either through simple misunderstanding or an unwillingness to concede their original point.

13:30 / 17.04.02

I'm curious (to coine a phrase). Please describe this alleged heteronormativity/heteronormacy in detail. What are we really talking about? What group or pattern of behaviors are indicated by "heteromormacy"? How narrowly or broadly is it defined?

23:35 / 17.04.02

Roughly, heteronormativity refers to the common assumption amongst heterosexuals that others they meet are heterosexual, unless specifically distinguished as otherwise; to fag and dyke bashing, etc., esp. in contrast to the rates of sexuality-related hate crimes targeting heterosexuals; to the wide range of laws discriminating against queers, from sodomy laws to superannuation laws and marriage-related tax breaks; to the insanely disporportionate number of heterosexuals represented in popular (and underground) entertainment, and the generally stereotypical and/or annoying nature of exceptions to this rule; etc. It refers, generally, to the objective and intangible social benefits accruing to heterosexuals, and those who appear to be heterosexuals.

Now, I'm pretty sure you know that or could have worked it out for yourself; I find it pretty fucking annoying that people are acting like they don't know what all the faggots are complaining about.

00:23 / 18.04.02

Thank you for answering my questions and I'm sorry you are annoyed.

Your understanding seems to vary from Alki's. Quoting from the initial post: "If I got this right, heteronormacy or heteronormativity is the set of values which police the way people behave, and say that behaving like a straight person is OK and not behaving like a straight person is not." This is the definition to which I was seeking clarification.

00:38 / 18.04.02

i don't see a contradiction - i just offered a more specific version of what alki said.

Haus about we all give each other a big lovely huggle?

08:04 / 18.04.02

Easy there, Dread Pirate Crunchy. I don't see why we should assume Aussieintn already knew the answer to the question he was asking - isn't one of the things about heteronormativity that it's pretty much invisible if you're straight, unless you're kind of looking for it?

If we use DPC's definition, which sounds a lot more thorough than mine, in what way does heteronormativity/heteronormacy no longer exist? I don't get it...

Haus about we all give each other a big lovely huggle?

08:14 / 18.04.02

I just thought - maybe there's a tie-in with Ganesh's "passing" thread here? Like, heteronormativity means you're kind of expected to pass as straight all the time (unless you're in a "gay/queer space")whether or not you are, and if you don't then everything sort of hiccups. So if you are in a bar with a bunch of guys and they are all talking about how much they want to get dirty with Carrie-Ann Moss, and somebody suddenly says "Actually, I really want to get daisy-chained by Guy Pearce and Keanu Reeves", then all the chat stops...

11:07 / 18.04.02

I think it's ironic that I am assumed to be straight, and the assumption implied that all who are gay/queer have a clear and unambiguous understanding of heteronormacy/heteronormativity.

11:21 / 18.04.02

Dread, I didn't say that you contradicted Alki, only that the two definitions varied. Yours is far more specific and seems to limit the range of behaviors that could be considered heteronormative.

Later, I'll do a search on the 'Net for the word and further improve my education. No time right now.

03:57 / 19.04.02

When I said I was annoyed, I wasn't referring specifically to Aussie, but to a good number of posters in this thread. And that list wasn't supposed to be exhaustive; its a list of some examples of heteronormativity, not a definition.