Talk:Heterosexism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is covered by WikiProject LGBT studies, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to LGBT issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class.
  • "Heterosexism. This term was coined by analogy with sexism. The dictionary defines it as "discrimination or prejudice against gay or homosexual people by heterosexual people." As with racism and sexism, this book takes the view that it is structural or institutional forces that underpin social inequalities, rather than individual prejudiced attitudes. Thus, heterosexism would refer to the heterosexual ideology that is encoded into and characteristic of the major social, cultural, and economic institutions of our society. See Racism and "Sexism. Gender, Race, and Class in Media: A Text-Reader by Gail Dines, ISBN 076192261X.
Hyacinth 00:11, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Material removed

As "David" admits below, he removed an insertion to this term that said, "The term's validity hinges in part on the belief that there is no element of choice involved in homosexuality, which has not been scientifically proven. The idea of heterosexism treats all disapproval of homosexuality as a mental disorder, completely dismissing religious or moral objections to the practice. If choice is involved in homosexuality, then morality is in play, and the term heterosexism is in many ways an illogical word."

David disagreed, saying, "It's perfectly logical to continue to believe heterosexuality is the only normal or moral sexuality for a human being while at the same time believing that it is possible to choose sexual orientation."

But that is not the point. The point is that the term "heterosexism" places disagreement with a chosen sexual or gender behavior, homosexuality, or transgenderism, and classifies it as a form of racism. This is illogical, because racism is hatred or discrimination of someone based on their essential nature.

Now, no doubt there is much debate over how much of someone's nature their sexual preference defines. But few would say that our sexual preferences define the totality of our being. Yet heterosexism buys into the theory that if you practice homosexuality, you are, above all else, a homosexual, who was born that way. Of course, there is no scienfitic evidence for this, and Robert L. Spitzer's 2001 study on "ex-gays" is one of the most authoritative studies done on the issue of choice as it relates to homosexuality.

The New Yorker Magazine in 2003 called Dr. Spitzer "without question, one of the most influential psychiatrists of the twentieth century." And Dr. Spitzer's study found that some homosexuals "can and do change" to prefer heterosexuality.

"There is evidence that change in sexual orientation following some form of reparative therapydoes occur in some gay men and lesbians," Dr. Spitzer wrote.

Again, heterosexism takes someone who believes that it is wrong to practice homosexuality or to have sexual reassignment surgery (a sex change), and places them in a box, saying that that person does not disagree with a choice, but in fact that they disagree with the person him or herself who is making that choice. Further, the term says, you are not just disagreeing with the person who makes that choice, you hate that person.

In other words, the word heterosexism is a conversation ender. It is an attempt to short-circuit debate over the morality of sexual and gender choices by labeling those who disagree with certain choices as, essentially, racist. It is a hateful term in and of itself, because it demonizes those who have deeply held religious and moral beliefs.

I agree with David that use of the term "heterosexism" doesn't require that one believes sexual orientation is essential or unchosen; we have a similar concept of unjustified bias against someone based on religion, which is most certainly chosen. If you believe homosexuality is an entirely chosen behavior, it would still be unjustified (and heterosexist) to criticize that person's ability to do something completely unrelated to their sexuality, like programming a computer or cooking a steak, on the basis of their being gay. However, I think you are right that the analogy to racism should be noted in the article, as should the fact that many who oppose homosexuality find this analogy unfair, since they do not believe sexual orientation to be unchangeable as race certainly is. How does that sound? - AdelaMae (talk - contribs) 05:19, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Adela Mae -- you can disagree with someone's religion, meaning you think they are wrong, and still treat them with love and respect. Likewise, you can disagree with someone's sexual preference, meaning you think they are wrong, and still treat them as well with love and respect. Disagreement is not "unjustified bias."

Please reread my comments. That is exactly what I said. - AdelaMae (talk - contribs) 08:12, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

So are you saying that some people who think homosexuality is morally wrong are heterosexist, because they are hateful, but that it is okay for some people to think homosexuality is immoral, because they are not hateful?

I'm saying that some people who believe homosexuality is morally wrong (and probably a few who don't) are heterosexist because, based on their knowledge that a person is a homosexual, they make unsubstantiated judgements about other aspects of that person (competence to perform specific tasks, parenting ability, etc). People who believe homosexuality to be morally wrong but do not allow that belief to influence their judgements about homosexual people in areas not directly related to their homosexuality are not heterosexist. I personally believe that such people are incorrect about the ethical facts of the matter, but what I personally believe is irrelevant to the definition of heterosexism. - AdelaMae (talk - contribs) 03:01, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

AdelaMae - I appreciate the clarification. That is helfpul. The problem is that the definition of heterosexism on the main page does not match what you've just said. The definition, as currently posted, says that heterosexism is "a belief or argument that male-female sexuality is the only natural or moral mode of sexual behavior." Obviously, according to this definition, someone who you said is not heterosexist--a person who has moral opposition to homosexuality but does "not allow that belief to influence their judgments about homosexual people in areas not directly related to their homosexuality"--actually IS defined as heterosexist.

Therefore, despite the very helpful and civil and admirable dialogue we've had, the definition as written currently is what I've described above--a "conversation ender. It is an attempt to short-circuit debate over the morality of sexual and gender choices by labeling those who disagree with certain choices as, essentially, racist. It is a hateful term in and of itself, because it demonizes those who have deeply held religious and moral beliefs."

I believe some changes should be made, and that the page should be placed under NPOVD.

[edit] Heterosexism

Hi,

I am not articulate to write the article but here are some further suggestions which encapsulate what heterosexism is: a belief in a society constructed on heterosexist norms with the exclusion of homosexuality or homosexuality as a secondary conduit.

I found this article on the web which explains what I am tyring to say..


http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/prej_defn.html

Around the same time, heterosexism began to be used as a term analogous to sexism and racism, describing an ideological system that denies, denigrates, and stigmatizes any nonheterosexual form of behavior, identity, relationship, or community (Herek, 1990). Using the term heterosexism highlights the parallels between antigay sentiment and other forms of prejudice, such as racism, antisemitism, and sexism. Like institutional racism and sexism, heterosexism pervades societal customs and institutions. It operates through a dual process of invisibility and attack. Homosexuality usually remains culturally invisible; when people who engage in homosexual behavior or who are identified as homosexual become visible, they are subject to attack by society.

Examples of heterosexism in the United States include the continuing ban against lesbian and gay military personnel; widespread lack of legal protection from antigay discrimination in employment, housing, and services; hostility to lesbian and gay committed relationships, recently dramatized by passage of federal and state laws against same-gender marriage; and the existence of sodomy laws in more than one-third of the states.

Although usage of the two words has not been uniform, homophobia has typically been employed to describe individual antigay attitudes and behaviors whereas heterosexism has referred to societal-level ideologies and patterns of institutionalized oppression of non-heterosexual people.

[edit] Problem para

I removed the following para from the article:

The term's validity hinges in part on the belief that there is no element of choice involved in homosexuality, which has not been scientifically proven. The idea of heterosexism treats all disapproval of homosexuality as a mental disorder, completely dismissing religious or moral objections to the practice. If choice is involved in homosexuality, then morality is in play, and the term heterosexism is in many ways an illogical word.

The validity of the term 'heterosexism' certainly doesn't depend on whether sexual orientation is chosen. It's perfectly logical to continue to believe heterosexuality is the only normal or moral sexuality for a human being while at the same time believing that it is possible to choose sexual orientation. Nor does heterosexism imply mental disorder (it's arguable that 'homophobia' does, but that's not the subject of this article). David | Talk 13:21, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Random musings

The article states that the literal meaning of heterosexism would be: "a belief that one type of heterosexuality is inherently 'better' than another type of heterosexuality" So maybe the correct term would be sexualityism (sexualitism?), implying a belief that one type of sexuality is inherently better; i.e. heterosexuality is better than homosexuality.

Anyways, that's my two cents.

[edit] Homosexism (gendered elements)

Worth mentioning--220.238.26.121 08:02, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

As i understand it; The term heterosexism refers to a set of societal beliefs that males and females are naturally opposite and complimentary and that therefore heterosexuality is the “natural” or “right” form of sexuality. Central to this concept is an essentialist notion of femininity and masculinity, ascribing specific sets of behaviours as acceptable for males or females. Heterosexism and homophobia are interrelated concepts. Heterosexism does not refer merely to the privileging of heterosexuality over homosexuality, the enforcement of gender roles is truely central to the idea.

Furthermore, i think it is the gender element of the concept that necessitates the "sexism" part of the word, so the "hetero" part is needed to imply the sexuality element? I think its a great word- no need to change it!!!


[edit] Homosexism II

How is it ok to have an article on heterosexim and heteronormativity, and not homosexism or homonormativity ? -- 65.27.246.163 08:36, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

If that bothers you, feel free to click on the links and write the respective articles. - AdelaMae (talk - contribs) 03:20, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Heterosexism vs. Heterocentrism

Given the definitions given for each of these terms, it seems to me that the example given (of someone assuming that if a woman is going on a date, it must be a date with a man) is clearly an example of heterocentrism rather than heterosexism, so I moved it down to the appropriate place in the article. AdelaMae 17:44, 3 November 2005 (UTC)


[edit] More About Heterosexism vs. Heterocentrism

Since the article states heterosexism should NOT be confused with heterocentrism, why on earth does Hetercentrism point here? Even if the article may be short, heterocentrism and the facts relating to it should be put into a new article. There is no reason to group these two very different words.