Talk:Heteronormativity/Archive 2005 8-10

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Game, Set, Match

OK, how about I just do a more direct route? Here are examples of heteronormativity not in academia or activist circles, most of which predate Ms Pinkett-Smith's comment:

Amazingly enough, apparently the Faux News Network itself was actually reporting on heteronormativity before Ms Pinkett-Smith's speech! No! Shock! Awe! “Birthday Bashing, Heteronormative Hoopla” Monday, September 27, 2004

(Feel free to read no further if you'd like to concede the point here. Everything after the FNN quote about the term that predated Ms Pinkett-Smith's speech by several months is really only gravy, since the claim that the FNN article on JPS's speech was the 'first' time this came on the public's radar is now absolutely refuted. Assuming we define play on FNN as the 'public radar'? Of course the 'sad little sperm who lost his tail' one is almost worth reading further. And some of these 'pop references' go back to 1996.)

From the Entertainment/TV Radio Section of The Age in Australia: Chasing rainbows March 12, 2004 “Gay men are allowed to feature in the scenario only to the extent that they will aid and abet this process of heteronormativity, and, it should be added, capitalist consumerism.”

Birmingham UUChurch's Children's Book Project: Sexual Prejudice Hurts Children: Sexual prejudice is a term that refers to a range of attitudes and behaviors including: homophobia: the fear of anyone who is not heterosexual; heterosexism: discrimination against GLBTQ persons; and heteronormativity: the pernicious, unquestioned and ubiquitous assumption that the norm is heterosexual.

Prospectus of a general purpose encyclopedia published by Greenwood Publishing Group (leading publisher of school, professional, and public library reference books.) “This has resulted in the exclusion of non-heterosexual issues and topics (variously manifested in heterosexism, homophobia, and heteronormativity).” “Clear and jargon-free entries particularly suitable for teachers, administrators, counselors, and students.”

British Columbia Court Document:Heterosexism expresses itself in “heteronormativity” which attributes some form of superiority or privilege to “heterosexuality.”

An art exhibit:In her first solo exhibition, the artist focuses on the themes of heterosexism and heteronormativity, which organize not only subjectivity and desire, but also language, knowledge and culture, family, state and economy.

Model corporate policy for a law firm from the Law Society of Upper Canada: Heterosexism/Heteronormativity is the presumption that heterosexuality is universal, normative and/or superior to homosexuality. Also: prejudice, bias or discrimination based on such presumptions.

HIV/AIDS handbook from USAID: “heteronormativity – standardization of the entire society under the presumption that heterosexuality is the only thing normal and acceptable”

From a Pro-Life Nutter Manifesto: (1997 revision): “Chapter 117: The True Objective Of `Gay Rights' - Total Domination!” (Idiots.... our objective isn't total domination, its world domination. Duh!) Quoting some normal person: “Our goal is to challenge the pervasive and often invisible heteronormativity of modern societies ... ”

Ooh, same quote used by more religious nutters: CHAPTER 4 — INTRODUCTION TO ANTI-LIFE STRATEGIES AND TACTICS American Life League (4/1/1996) “What more proof do we need? They even want to eliminate genders. The so-called 'Queer Manifesto' being circulated by sodomites at some universities says that 'Queer politics is no longer content to carve out a buffer zone for a minoritized and protected subculture. Our goal is to challenge the pervasive and often invisible heteronormativity of modern societies ... Our task is to confront modern culture with its worst nightmare a queer planet.' Homosexual strategists Kirk and Pill say that 'Our work will not be finished until we can say that the whole world is gay.'[7]”

Quote on a decidedly non-academic message board referencing the EWTN document... LOVE the 'fro on the guy who posted this.

Same quote, again in a pro-choice nutter howto guide. (Oct 2002.)

A conservative Blogger griping: “Meanwhile, heteronormativity is on the run in Ontario, where a newly passed law eliminates the terms 'husband' and 'wife' from the law book in favor of "spouse," so as not to discriminate against gay marriage.”

I don't know if you would consider this academic, but apparently one can purchase a term paper on the concept in Latin America. “Heteronormativity and the History of Latin America ” Is CliffNotes and purchased papers 'academic'?

KidsNet Australia: (Those little future-members-of-the-intelegentsia) “In the early 20th century, western gender roles were based around the idea of heteronormativity, and as such they were comparatively fixed. People who transgressed gender roles, such as a woman with a high-powered job, frequently experienced disapproval and discrimination.”

NY Times article describes how U of Chicago has several new bathrooms for those uncomfortable about classifying themselves in with the “hegemonic taxonomies of bourgeois heteronormativity.” (Sorry the whole times article is unavailable w/o paying.)

I don't know if you consider a trade union of public school teachers 'academia', but assuming you don't think grade school teachers are... “children begin school already having experienced 'heteronormativity' and homophobia. ”

OK, Admittedly, this is from an academic journal.... but I had to include it... just for the title: “‘Billy, the Sad Sperm with No Tail’: Representations of Sperm in Children’s Books”

Apparently people are even cybersquatting the term.

I'm guessing that you'd agree that merely because something is voiced by gay people, its not necessarily the words of an activist? This is from a gay.com travel article. “Theme parks bring out the kid in everyone. Only problem for us is that theme parks tend also to feature undesirable heteronormative imagery: a seething mass of "nuclear" families with dad, mom and 2.5 urchins. Pretty daunting stuff for a couple of queer fellas from Des Moines or two gay ladies with their own batch of surrogate-fathered children. What's a rollercoaster-loving non-traditional family to do?”

I'm significantly bothered that you are couching this in terms of a contest, rather than of research and the desire to find truth. That said, yes, you have some good citations there. I'd pick whichever you consider the one or two best and add them to the page. Nice find, and a decent update to the page. -Harmil 23:12, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

Harmil: “What I'm interested in is the specific point, which you have not responded to. This term has been used in a way that the mainstream media and thus the general public would have been aware of once. If mentioning that damages the case for heteronormativity in some way, then there never was a case (and I believe there is such a case... but that's POV, and I'm not going to insert that POV). No entry on Wikipedia should be held up to a less harsh light than that of truth and rigorous, informed, logical debate. Period. Ever.”

So the cold hard truth is that the troll who inserted the comment about the JPS incident being the first time this has occurred in the media was FACTUALLY WRONG. I have known from (albeit anecdotal) personal experience this is not the case. So I have been arguing to protect this article from the troll's decidedly POV slur that this is just some academic PC nonsense. Then when I finally prove the point, you still don't want to remove the troll's slur, but rather let it stand and simply add this.

Sorry, but why don't you hold your own version up to the same light you'd like to add to my edit? “No entry on Wikipedia should be held up to a less harsh light than that of truth and rigorous, informed, logical debate.” Well, you've maintained the fact that the first time the term was in the 'public eye' was the FNN story about the JPS incident. However, when the debate on this proves it to not be true – by an article on the same 'news' network, you still don't want to remove that 'fact'.

And couching it in terms of winning is exactly right: truth will win out in the end. I have given you irrefutable proof that the comment is not true yet you still seem to only advocate adding this rather than subtracting the falsehood. NickGorton 23:32, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

Ah... I think we've gone off the rails here. Let me be clearer:

YOU WERE RIGHT, PLEASE EDIT THE PAGE WITH RESPECT TO THE INFORMATION THAT YOU GATHERED, AND THANK YOU FOR DOING SO!

I hope that explains my position in a slightly clearer manner. Take care, NickGorton, and please remember: I'm not one of the bad guys.... Really. -Harmil 00:56, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

PS: In regards to your recent edit (looks like you already did what I suggested above before I suggested it... excellent). It seems good, but a tad convoluted, and I got lost on the logical transition from paragraph 1 to 2 of the new defense section. I've asked some others to take a look though, so that I can avoid further mucking with it, and therefore any bad feelings betwen you and I. -Harmil 01:17, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Jada Pinkett Smith paragraph

I really can't for the life of me figure out what that paragraph is supposed to be saying, even after following the links. The one in the article is absolutely worthless. But here on the talk page, I managed to locate:

"Women, you can have it all - a loving man, devoted husband, loving children, a fabulous career..."

Well, OK, doing way more work than a reader should have to, I can find a really mild and convoluted example. Yes, sure, this is a heteronormative comment, but about as banal and common a one as you can imagine. And something much like comments made by just about any famous person at some point.

Can we find something a bit more clear, and a bit more compelling example? Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 03:02, 2005 September 3 (UTC) {talkarchive}}

Political correctness

Heteronormativity (as a theory of social science) is one of the poster children for anti-political correctness conservatives in the U.S. [1], and to ignore that fact would be to do Wikipedia a disservice. I'm not saying that we should be beating the drum of right-wing ideology, but to remove the Category:Political correctness tag from the article does seem to be explicitly excluding that interpretation. That is why I put the category back. It gives people surfing categories a link to this page (useful on its own) and gives people reading this article a gateway to other topics similarly categorized. -Harmil 11:49, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

And, as I immediately noticed when hitting submit, that cat doesn't exist (anymore?), so I changed it to the two cats from Political correctness that seemed to match best: Category:Political neologisms and Category:Sociolinguistics. Those two also just happen to fit this article much more clearly, IMHO, so all the better. -Harmil 11:54, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

I have no idea why sociolinguistics would be discussed under the political correctness article. I suspect the editors of the PC page are writing utterly nonsensical drivel (perhaps some C- undergrads who think every academic course they don't like is thereby "politically correct"; maybe I'll add linear algegebra on similar criteria... actually, I'm fond enough of algebra, but someone probably dislikes it). But I haven't even read the page, not being a masochist. But sociolinguistics, in any case, is utterly unrelated to this topic, so I'm going to make sure that silly cat isn't on this page (not an inherently silly category, sociolinguistics, it's an important subfield of linguistics; just silly in the context of this page). Heteronormativity is a neologism, so that's OK. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 16:17, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Bold text