Fairfax, VA, USA. The word heteronormative was invented by the academic gender theorists to describe anyone who believes that heterosexuality is the normal sexual orientation. I don’t know how “normal” it is but, using the gay community’s most optimistic number for the prevalence of non-heterosexuals, that still leaves 85% of the human population’s sexual preference as straight, rather than gay, lesbian, bisexual, or what have you got.

I don’t know if that is normal but it is certainly the vast majority. If a presidential candidate receives 60% of the popular vote, we call it a landslide. The human preference for heterosexuality, hardwired into the human brain just like being gay, is more than a landslide.

The majority is not necessarily normal but neither does the conclusion that most people are straight automatically marginalize non-heterosexuality. However 15% does not a majority make. Both the median and the mode for human sexuality is heterosexual.

If you had to bet whether a random person approaching you was gay or straight, you would come out ahead at the end of the day by just choosing “straight.” Randomly betting that someone is not heterosexual without a lot of additional substantiating information is a bad bet.

 

 

Dual Control Model Of Sexual Response

 

The Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender and Reproduction has been developing, testing, and fine-tuning a theoretical model that reflects the idea that sexual response in individuals is the product of a balance between excitatory and inhibitory processes.

 

Researchers believe these two systems operate somewhat independent of each other and are different in each person. The key elements:

 

•  Separate and relatively independent activating and suppressing sexual systems exist within the central nervous system.

 

•  The balance between these two systems determines a person's sexual response in any particular situation.

 

The model is used in studies as varied as sexual dysfunction and sexual risk taking. To measure the propensity for sexual excitation and inhibition, the researchers designed specialized questionnaires. One of them is the Sexual Excitation/Sexual Inhibition Inventory for Women which rates current sexual problems, lifetime arousal difficulties, and problems with low sexual interest.  

 

The model is now used by researchers in the US and Europe, with translations in Dutch, French, and German.

 

---

 

The Sexual Inhibition (SIS) and Sexual Excitation (SES) Scales: I. Measuring sexual inhibition and excitation proneness in men. Janssen, E., Vorst, H., Finn, P., & Bancroft, J. (2002a). Journal of Sex Research, 39, 114-126. [ Download PDF ]

 

The Sexual Inhibition (SIS) and Sexual Excitation (SES) Scales: II. Predicting psychophysiological response patterns. Janssen, E., Vorst, H., Finn, P., & Bancroft, J. (2002b). Journal of Sex Research, 39, 127-132. [ Download PDF ]

When this is pointed out, of course, the gender theorists start talking about “gender” by which they mean how someone dresses, acts, or speaks in their everyday life, whether they prefer to live in a masculine role or a feminine role or something else entirely. Fine, go to it, but gender theorists seem to be constantly redefining the scope and application of heteronormativity to suit whatever argument they find convenient to make in response to questioning. If nothing else, the definition of heteronormativity is extremely squishy.

Sort of like jello that hasn’t been refrigerated long enough before it was served;

Or like ice cream that has been left in the trunk of a car and not thought about too much for a couple two-three hours some summer day;

And very definitely, like a cake that has been left out in the rain too long.

Why is this happening? What is it with the irrational academic compulsion to deconstruct the world the rest of us live in?

Well … they are academics, after all, and who want to mess up a beautiful social theory with the facts?

But that is too flippant an answer, a stereotype, even if there is probably a good deal of truth to it.

Gender theory is a repository and expression of a deep-seated psychic urge to blow up the body politic and the society that maintains it. The gender theorists harbor a thinly veiled resentment and disdain for the world around them, especially anything they perceive as even being vaguely capitalistic.

Chinese socialism also emphasizes theoretical gender equality, first Mao’s generation

… but this emphasis was to make the two sexes more united in the building of socialism … Love and marriage were also secondary to revolution. Another consequence of the emphasis on gender equality in China was many educated women’s looking down upon household chores and child rearing. Work came first, and household duties second. [N1]

Too easy. Something more current

Harmonious development of gender relationships should be based on gender equality. As gender equality is not necessarily achieved by harmonious social and economic development, systemized equality of thought and theory should be on its development agenda. Gender inequality should be resolved through comprehensive reappraisal of economy, law and propaganda; promoting gender equality is necessary to establish an advanced gender culture and improve socialist, political and cultural civilization. [N2]

And of this sound vaguely familiar?

Ok, that was too glib, too much like shooting fish in a barrel or counter revolutionaries with a firing squad. Some gender theorists are probably not socialist or opposed to the current political or social structure in the United States.

Let’s look at postmodernism, the great bastion of university intellectualism. I can’t define postmodernism (it’s like squeezing jello, ice cream in the trunk, a cake out in the rain, etc.), but I know it when I see it.

Both gender theorists and postmodernists [N3] believe that there are no underlying principles or conventions we can trust, e.g., the sexual binary or heterosexuality [N4]. Gender theorists, like the postmodern professors and university trained critics before them, take it upon themselves as the sole arbitrator in charge of identifying, naming, and ultimately shattering the rules the rest of us live.

Coherence? Don’t count on it and please don’t ask.

Gender theory is the first cousin of punk rock, the snobby sister who puts on airs, pretends to be better than most everyone else, then wonders out loud why she doesn’t feel loved. Gender theorists are the punk rockers of the new millennium, the ones who insist that being male or female reflects an outmoded attachment to an obsolete form. [N5]

Don’t look for logic or hard science either. For gender theorists, often emotions are enough and the dominate emotions appear to be moral superiority and righteous anger. [N6] It’s gender as conceptual art.

Too much of academic colloguia confuses serious contemplation with casual discussion. For such, the sexual binary — based on anatomical and endocrine differences — inevitably slides into questions of gender, deemed a purely societal construction by gender theorists. The conflation of sex and gender erases the differences between the sexes, then leads to an argument that sex also is a societal construction. As a result, both sex and gender are matters of perception, with no anchor in objective reality outside of human consciousness.

If we, the unwashed masses, object to any part of gender theory, we are told that the professor knows best and that we would agree with them if only be had benefited from a proper university education, especially one focused on gender theory and the need to publish. If we asked enough questions, they suddenly become the victim, and we, the other 85% of the human experience, become the elite heteronormative persecutors of the innocent martyrs of gender theory.

Ms. Lisa Jain Thompson is a Co-Founder & Principal of TS-Si. She also serves as a Contributing Editor and columnist for the TS-Si website. She maintains another site, StarPoet.com, for her poetry and literary works.

Ms. Thompson's signed articles contain her own opinions and do not necessarily convey an official position of TS-Si, its partners, or affiliates. Lisa welcomes your comments. Use the form below or email via her TS-Si Contact Page. We will not divulge any personal details or place you on a mailing list without your permission.

The TS-Si News Service is a collaborative effort by TS-Si.org editors, contributors, and corresponding institutions. Sources can include the cited individuals and organizations, as well as TS-Si.org staff contributions. Articles and news reports do not necessarily convey official positions of TS-Si, its partners, or affiliates. We welcome your comments. Use the form below to leave a public comment or send private correspondence via the TS-Si Contact Page. We will not divulge any personal details or place you on a mailing list without your permission.


TS-Si is dedicated to the acceptance, medical treatment, and legal protection of individuals correcting the misalignment of their brains and their anatomical sex, while supporting their transition into society as hormonally reconstituted and surgically corrected citizens.

Tweet

Comments (2)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Show/hide comments

Show/hide comment form

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage.

Add Comment