Though I know where you’re coming from. Most of my closest friends are bisexual (as am I) and it’s a different experience when my straight or GL friends are over as the dynamic is changes with regards to discussions around romantic/sexual relationships.

to remember the homos and that our default experience is not the same as the heteros’.

And to remember the bisexuals and everyone else too… ;-)

I’m not sure how to phrase this without sounding like an ass, so I’m just going to be blunt and then apologize profusely.

Heterosexuality kind of is the default–you can assume that something like 85% of the people you see walking down the street are het. If (to use a totally made-up example), 85% of people with blue hair owned guinea pigs, it would not be unreasonable to ask a new blue-haired acquaintance how their guinea pig was. The reaction of the non-pig-owning blue-haired person should then be, “Oh, I don’t have one,” and then you both get on with the getting-to-know-you conversation.

This is not to say that I think homosexuality is bad, because I don’t; who someone has sex with is not even my concern unless they want to have sex with me, and even then their gender is of far less import than whether they’ll take “no” for an answer. Being gay is not bad or evil or ungodly or sinful or any of the stupid words that people with too much time on their hands try to stick to it. But it is uncommon.

Be nice if the media would recognize that “uncommon” isn’t the same as “nonexistant”, though. I am now picturing a Cosmo cover blurb about “Six Sex Tricks She’ll Love”, which is a truely bizarre image, because, well, Cosmo.

Is someone heterosexist if they don’t want to see lesbians or gay men kissing in public? I would say that person is heterosexist. I definitely do not see myself as heterosexist but I am sure many times I have done it without even realising it. Do we as heterosexuals take our “luxuries” if they can even be called that for granted?

I think it has to go deeper. (and I know that a readable post leaves out a lot, so this is not intended as any reflection on the clarity of your writing.)

I think that to judge what is going on when someone doesn’t want to see gay or lesbian people kissing in public depends on why. Do they want everyone equally to get a room? Is this reserved only of gay and lesbian people? Is it about appropriateness? Linked to perceptions of marriage? Etc.

If it is the ick factor with regards same-sex activity, or worse, the existence of gay people, then it is homophobia, and bigotry.

If it is based on the idea that married or committed couples can peck each other on the cheek or dry kiss as a sign of simple affection, but that gay people are inherently not committed, having shallow relationships, etc, so by definition, any gay people are “having sex” in public even when they peck each other goodbye at the train station, then it is probably a bit of both.

If it is based on the idea that people shouldn’t be doing things in public that make others uncomfortable, but different rules for essentially identical behavior apply to gay and lesbian people, then it is probably far more heterosexism.

I’ve heard the term “bisupremacy” in reference to those who think that everyone is inherently bisexual, and it seems like a good word to me.
I haven’t heard anyone “declare that certain races or creeds cannot be gay/bi/trans/whatever”, but have come across the assumption that the person in question must be putting it on, or seeking attention; ‘wanting to be different’ as my Grandma would say.
(And I agree with ju: single-sex attracted people are just flipping weird, but if they enjoy it, that’s their prerogative).

It jangles when I see someone declare that certain races or creeds cannot be gay/bi/trans/whatever, because that’s like saying apples can’t be eaten in the winter since they grow in the spring/summer. It’s two different things and one isn’t encumbent upon the other. A friend of mine is Comanche and when she came out to her family, she was told that Indians aren’t gay. Yeah, doesn’t work that way, sorry.

For the most part, I don’t assume that everyone will agree with/know about/care about my particular axe to grind. I don’t expect everyone to automatically include the LGBT communtiy in their thought process, though I’m always pleased when they do. If they don’t include it and I think it deserves a bit of a shout out, I’ll speak up, but I don’t get my panties in a twist over it, unless they are being assinine about it, then I come out both barrels blazing. Live and let live is a pretty nice philosophy.

Heteronormativity is the state of enforced heterosexuality. Heteronormativity seeks to silence, persecute or marginalize other sexual orientations. Heteronormativity also enforces traditional gender roles. Again as in heterosexism, heterosexuality is considered the only natural form of sexuality and sex role.

Homophobia was technically the fear of homosexuality but now also means hatred, bias and bigotry against homosexuals.

The terms parallel the feminist terms sexism, patriarchy and misogyny in many key ways.

Feeling type A today.

Anyway. Being automatically left out of many, many conversations does get lonely after a while, but I try not to take any of it personally. This is of course different from what a bi- or homosexual person* experiences, and certainly different from what a POC who is bi or gay experiences.

I bring up my asexuality because of this:

And personally, I can’t see anything heteronormative or heterosexist about that. Since a lesbian woman can experience pregnancy without involving sex with a male (artificial insemination by donor being possible these days), it follows that any woman, regardless of sexual orientation, can have a wish to be pregnant without wishing to have sex with anybody; and that any woman, regardless of sexual orientation, can wish to have children without wishing to undergo pregnancy to achieve that goal.

This sounds pretty accurate to me.

I’m very interested in the race and sexual orientation and nationality intersection situation raised in the original post. The “Un-African” statement is startling, but of course not unfamiliar, overall. Being unpatriotic or “not a proper citizen” is such a strange and powerful tool of uniformity and oppression. I’d love to hear more about the intersections of race, sex, class, and nationality.

*Asexuals of course can also be romantically attracted to one or both sexes, either opposite or same, but this is getting rather technical and complicated and not necessary to the discussion at all (but I felt clarification was needed).

I think this particular question pushed my buttons because I work in the childbirth field, and I find that normally queer-friendly (or even queer!) people often see a pregnant person and create a whole set of assumptions about sexuality, gender identity, marital status, etc.

Other readers have addressed this, but when I said the question was heterosexist I meant that it presumed that we are all heterosexual. I differentiate between that and homophobia, a fear or hatred of perceived homosexuality.