Male And Female Gender Binaries Are Shaped By Heteronormativity And The Idea Of Courtly Love

Gender can be a hot topic within cultures; a male or female does not want to be told that they can or cannot do something based on their gender. Every culture views gender roles differently, and some cultures are more serious about gender than others. Many times, male and female actions are determined by what a person has been taught is right; furthermore, gender roles are a set of societal norms that are the behaviors that a sex is generally known to do and what is considered accepted of a person based on their sex; gender roles can also known as stereotypes (“Gender”). Many times men are associated with masculine and logical ways in the United States, whereas women are associated with nurturing and passive ways.

Americans live in a society that seems constantly plagued by various types of discrimination. For instance, ableism, classism, and sizeism are a few examples of the sorts of systematic discriminations that Americans face every day. However, as of late, one of the most prevalent forms that targets homosexual minorities is Heterosexist discrimination. Heterosexism is defined as the discrimination or prejudice against homosexuals (“Heterosexism”). In addition to being prejudiced and discriminatory, Heterosexism is more often than not paired with the idea that heterosexuality is the normal sexual orientation, and therefore superior.

The concept of “heteronormativity” is the belief that it is only ‘normal’ ‘natural’ and ‘universal’ to have two different genders. In addition to these two genders it would only be ‘normal’ if there were clear and distinct differences between the two. This would include ones biological sex, ones gender identity, and ones gender role in society. This would also mean it would be considered ‘normal’ if these two different genders sexuality were heterosexual. Meaning a ‘normal’ sexual orientation would only be between one male and one female. Our society defines these norms through institutionalizing these concepts in our civilization.

Heteronormativity constructs heterosexual assumptions of gender and sex as an ideal and moral imperative, cooperating with and sustaining systems of power (Berlant and Warner 1998; Sharma 1999). Systems of power create a hierarchy within heteronormativity, doling privilege to some and marginalizing others. This hierarchy is present in homosexual communities as well. Norms within the homosexual community marginalize other kids of sex, gender, and sexuality difference (Stryker 2008). Using Butler’s concept of gender performativity illustrates the way that repetitive performances of gender leads to social coherency. Unable to attain heteronormative standards as lesbians, the couples conform to heteronormative standards in several key ways. Through the promotion of a homonormative-domestic discourse, producers tame the otherwise deviant sexual subjects to render them non-threatening to a straight audience, with a broader political impact that depoliticizes and demobilizes the LGBTQ population (Duggan 2002; Erhart 2013; Warner 2000). In adhering these key standards of heterosexual culture, a homonormative portrayal of lesbian motherhood emerges.

In modern culture people are presumed straight until proven otherwise. This ideology is what social theorists have claimed title to as heteronormativity. These uncivilized notions systemize the binaries of both sexual orientation and gender identity. Heteronormativity is a structure of hierarchal binaries that discriminates anyone who does not fit the social “norm” of heterosexuality. Heteronormative mindsets have damaging effects on queer society because they deem heterosexuality as the superior orientation; queer people are underrepresented in the media, politics, culture and other areas of life, leading them to feel marginalized, and it moreover encourages people to stay oblivious to queer orientations.

Normally, it has been discovered that heteros who accept sexual minority status is naturally decided and unchanging hold more great mentalities toward sexual minorities, than the individuals who see it as uninhibitedly picked or learnt (e.g., Aguero, Block, and Byrne, 1984; Haslam and Levy, 2006; Haslam, Rothschild and Ernst, 2002; Hegarty and Pratto, 2001; Jayaratne et al., 2006; Whitley, 1990). Given the inescapable ness of homophobic disgrace and segregation, and the ensuing battles numerous LGB individuals confront in tolerating their sexuality, sexual introduction convictions may hold profound individual criticalness for some LGB people. Many additionally hold hostile to essentialist convictions, keeping up that sexual introduction is

Sexual normativity does not only create social rules for society to follow but it also creates systems of inequality, where each system of inequality builds on each other. The power of sexuality normativity favors heteronormativity because heteronormative culture has interpreted itself in society as what is natural. Both heteronormativity and homonormativity favor upper and middle classes of white youth. While they are guided and accepted in society those who are of a different race or ethnicity are rejected (Garcia 2012:60). Power is unevenly distributed among these systems, and the ones with most power are tightly linked to male heteronormativity. The white masculine male is privileged and rewarded in society, where as women suffer the good-girl

However, because heteronormativity has been “neutralized” in society, it is difficult to change the views of many. (176). By breaking down heteronormativity, acceptance and inclusion of LGBTQ individuals may create a smooth transition. For example, the authors propose to educate students, teachers and parents on LGBTQ and heteronormativity. By creating a well rounded educational experience, children will learn to become more accepting at home and at school. Altogether, society must restructure its political views to create an inclusive and open minded set for the people living in

The author states, “heterosexism, or ‘the view that heterosexuality is the “norm” for all social/sexual relationships and...certainly permeates many discussions of sexism” (Dahl, 2015). This shows that there is an expectation that the female gender is automatically presumed to be interested only in the male gender, and this correlates to sexism. Heterosexuality is considered the norm in today’s society; however, that is stereotyping against the gender, which leads to sexism. This also leads to the assumption that females must behave like the stereotypical girl. The author states, “femininity [and] the restrictions it placed on me, was a learned role” (Dahl, 2015). This explains ever since she was young, expectations and gender roles were given to her such as learning to only be interested in the opposite gender and acting lady like. It it also stated that sexism “is rooted in the presumption that female and male are rigid, mutually exclusive, ‘opposite’ sexes” (Dahl, 2015). This tells the reader opposite sexes should only be attracted to one another and not the same sex, creating an unrealistic expectation since people cannot control their brain’s sexual interest. The researcher agrees with all of the statements above because they are clearly portrayed through everyday events. The article covers the stereotyping of relationship requirements in a thorough manner.

Employing Goffman’s original concept of stigma, Warren (1999) argues that the mainstream LGBT discourse has always had two sides to it: the stigmaphobes, who are afraid of being stigmatized and therefore, urges themselves and others to “assimilate” into the heterosexual values and cultures, and stigmaphiles, who appropriate and celebrate their stigmatized identities and promotes sexual radicalism (characterized by non-monogamous sexual relations, alternative sexual acts like BDSM, and so on) for everyone. The stigmaphobes and their assimilationist approaches reinforced and reproduced existing LGBT normativity and respectability by removing the discussion of sex from (homo)sexuality and instead, focusing on marriage and positive institutional sanctions for non-heterosexual intimate partnership. In doing so, proponents of same-sex marriage legalization often relied on and made their arguments based on the similarities between same-sex and opposite-sex relationships and families (Frost and Gola 2015; Matsick and Conley 2017; Bernstein 2015). However, Warner (1999) argues that this push for marriage equality was an attempt at controlling radical sexual behaviors by rewarding monogamy and institutionally recognizable intimate partnership. Warner further claims “Marriage, in short, would make for good gays—the kind who would not challenge the norms of

Heteronormativity- A man and woman born at birth. The norm of gender female and male at birth. Heterosexual role only. Marriage only between a man and woman. Two distinct gender. The model and role that each gender should play.

Heteronormativity is the idea that humans exist in specific, complementary genders and that having either of these two genders means that you are to follow the roles set by the society that you live in. It assumes that heterosexuality is the norm for humans and that marriages and sexual relations should occur exclusively between members of the opposite sex. Men should be masculine, emotionally conservative, have financial and social power and be interested in women, while women should be feminine, loving and emotional, instinctively maternal and be interested in finding a husband (Schilt & Westbrook, 2009).

Gender, Judith Butler explains, is “an identity tenuously constituted in time” she also states, it is “an identity instituted through a stylized repetition of acts.” (Butler, 519) Heterosexual norms implemented upon society are reinforced by numerous social limitations. The ways in which individuals are burdened by the social construct of gender ultimately creates a homogenized society following a heterosexual script, which allows these individuals to be perceived as ‘normal’ and anyone not following this script may be perceived as deviant. Although there are individuals and theories that resist heterosexual gender norms, the normalization of heterosexual normative masculinity and femininity are still very evident and apparent in the past and contemporary

It is essential for social institutions like the media, religion, work, and school to address and support various sexuality preferences. Not only address it in a positive meaningful way, but to create a space and accept various sexuality preferences. Essentially creating room for the intersex, a safe heaven for the individuals that are not fitting the American Binary gender model which currently only includes males and females. In the United States, individuals spend the majority of their time within these institutions, more than they do with their own families. Their lives depend on the already mentioned institutions for success. And because individuals rely on these institutions for success, it is essential to continue discussing, addressing and arbitrarily opposing institutions and places where there is no space for intersex.

When one is raised in a society that polices bodies into fitting a certain “acceptable norm,” adhering to that norm is expected and not adhering is punished (at least potentially). Considering that the current majority is heterosexual, the watched are constantly inundated with heteronormative ideals and standards to follow. Adhering to these standards cause a varying level of responses. For some, it is no issue; however, for others, adhering, though doable, might cause a difficult to name discomfort—some level of “off ”ness, and for some, adhering to the standards might prove to be extremely harmful and