DiscussionTQ+ derangement laid bare: Are You Straight Or Is It Just ‘ Compulsory Heterosexuality’?

submitted by ChunkeeguyTeam T*RF Fuck Yeah from refinery29.com

all 26 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]JulienMayfair 20 insightful - 2 fun20 insightful - 1 fun21 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

A lot of this goes back to blank slate theory and social constructionism. It was an interesting thought experiment at the time. Rich's quotes are from 42 years ago. But if you look at most species that reproduce sexually, heterosexuality does largely appear to be hardwired. I get the feeling that some of these people never watch nature documentaries or have never done any volunteer work in animal rescue.

What I particularly dislike is the aura of some malevolent conspiracy hanging over the whole thing. Yes, most people are heterosexual, and, yes, for that reason, human culture is usually organized around coping with that. LGB people will almost inevitably remain a small minority.

[–]xanditAGAB (Assigned Gay at Birth) 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

But if you look at most species that reproduce sexually, heterosexuality does largely appear to be hardwired.

its almost like sex developed as a means of reproducing species, what a crazy idea

[–]RedEyedWarriorGay | Male | 🇮🇪 Irish 🇮🇪 | Antineoliberal | Cocks are Compulsory 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Full of woke buzzwords. Ugh.

90-95% of people are straight. Homosexuals will always be a minority. Why is that the case? Because heterosexuals can reproduce from sexual activities that are natural for them. Not homosexuals - we’d have to adopt or go against our nature in order to become parents. Most people are straight, straight people reproduce, hence why every healthy society is built around families headed by opposite sex couples. Obviously same sex couples should have the same rights as opposite sex couples and gay people should not be discriminated against. But we are a minority and we need to accept that fact.

I’m not sure why bisexuals are also a minority given that they can reproduce, but they are a minority nonetheless. It’s not "compulsory heterosexuality" that’s forcing most them into opposite sex relationships, that’s for sure. Most of them just want to have children.

[–]IridescentAnacondastrictly dickly 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I think the prevalence of bisexuality as an orientation is much higher than suspected or than we can ever know, because there is a natural bias against acting on it in any socially meaningful way. As you said, "most of them just want to have children".

But homosexuality as a stable self-sustaining social phenomenon of the species is even more problematic than it might appear on the surface. It can only exist (as a stable self-sustaining social phenomenon) in urban environments. Because of the relatively low prevalence, the social identity can only be maintained when there are enough of us in a small area to sustain it.

[–]RedEyedWarriorGay | Male | 🇮🇪 Irish 🇮🇪 | Antineoliberal | Cocks are Compulsory 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Homosexuality can be sustainable in rural areas too. When a gay couple lives in the countryside and they have no children, they can devote more time to helping out their neighbours. Granted, if your gay and you want to live in the countryside, it’s a good idea to live in an urban area first until you find someone who has the same goal as you, and then you move to the countryside.

There are definitely more bisexuals than we think, but they are still a minority. But it could explain why a lot of people think homosexuality is a choice. If you like both sexes, you can "choose" to ignore your attraction to one of those sexes for the sake of survival if you live in an area that is homophobic or biphobic. But even without the homophobia or biphobia, most of your dating pool will be of the opposite sex and it’s way easier to have children if you’re in a relationship with someone or the opposite sex. Especially for bisexual men, because women can get pregnant but not men. Most bi men in same sex relationships either don’t want children or already have as much children as they can reasonably support.

[–]Q-Continuum-kin 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If we remove humans from the picture for a moment, the idea of sustaining homosexuality in urban areas basically just means that there are an overabundance of sexual opportunities for a species so that the glitch in our DNA doesn't negatively impact birth rates.

A 100 % homosexuality rate is sustainable for exactly 1 generation. If it's at 5% and the species has 1 member per 100sq miles then something like that could quickly end the species if you got some bad luck for a few generations.

[–]julesburm1891 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I couldn’t make it all the way through. How are people making something so simple so complicated?

if (you actively wanting to fuck a member of your sex == true) { std::cout << “You’re gay or bi.\n” }

else { std::cout << “You are straight.\n” }

Literally how is this complicated for people?

[–]sadbihours 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Straight people exist. It’s really ok to be straight.

[–]CleverFoolOfEarth 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

Y'know, I hate the TQ as much as the next Saiditor, but, loathe as I am to admit it, I actually not only agree with the Q on this but think they aren't going far enough to reach the root. Homosexuality exists, and bisexuality exists, but heterosexuality, if it exists, can only exist not as a sexuality but as body dysmorphia. If someone can't experience attraction to their own sex, that points to deep and pathological self-loathing that they may not understand that they have but most certainly do. That's why straight people are all so fucked up in the head, and I say that knowing that the man I plan to marry is one. I try to help him with the self-image issues (which for him are very out-in-the-open), but feel dreadful knowing that there's so many others like him that have nobody to help them and society just doesn't recognize that it's a problem and whenever someone does it's for the exact wrong (and very toxic) reasons.

Or maybe I'm getting this all wrong and am just basing this off the fact that my mother is obsessed with weight loss diets (and tries to push them on me sometimes even though I'm clinically underweight) and my father has arthritis now because he played too much tennis when he was younger because "men need to keep in shape, that's just how the world is".

Any thoughts?

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

If someone can't experience attraction to their own sex, that points to deep and pathological self-loathing that they may not understand that they have but most certainly do.

What.

[–]CleverFoolOfEarth 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It would explain the excessively high rates of dissatisfaction with appearance that I have observed amongst straights. That's literally my only evidence, it's not hatred, at least not a conscious one and I hope not a clear but by-myself-unseen one, it's a way to explain an unfortunate phenomenon of widespread insecurity.

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't really see that as a trait specific to heterosexual people, though patriarchy does exert its own pressures.

[–]ChunkeeguyTeam T*RF Fuck Yeah[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Surely they mean “gender”

[–]CleverFoolOfEarth 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Gender doesn't exist save for as a constellation of statistical averages that applies to populations rather than to individuals. Don't slander me, friend, for I am no enemy of yours.

[–]Q-Continuum-kin 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It seems more like they are trying to push an idea that anyone can just become somehow non-straight and their primary motivation is inverting the social hierarchy and making queer good and straights bad

[–]CleverFoolOfEarth 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Y'know, that makes a lot of sense.

[–]TiredTrendersSuper-gay 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

"If someone can't experience attraction to their own sex, that points to deep and pathological self-loathing that they may not understand that they have but most certainly do."

I beg your pardon?

[–]CleverFoolOfEarth 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Think about it, have you ever seen a happy, well-adjusted straight person that doesn't hate themself, nor any opposite-sex relationship (barring some long-distance ones between two people who are more like internet friends than lovers by any stretch of the imagination) that didn't leave one or both members miserable, literally ever? Or even heard a credible account of one? This account can be from any time period so long as it's a real person/couple that actually existed and isn't heavily-dramatized idealistic fiction.

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Yes I certainly have so this is a bizarre question to me.

[–]CleverFoolOfEarth 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Ah, very well then. This lends some credence to that this idea stems not from fact but from lack of worldly experience and from having grown up with parents who are both deeply unhappy people. I'll hafta have a bit of a think about that.

[–]Rosefield 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What are u smoking?

[–]MarkJeffersonTight defenses and we draw the line 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I'm pretty sure heterosexuals exist. A lot of them may fall into the AreTheStraightsOK or self-loathing category, but that's more an effect of a gender presentation/behavior/role fixated society. It doesn't mean they are repressing any same-sex attraction.

Or maybe I'm getting this all wrong and am just basing this off the fact that my mother is obsessed with weight loss diets (and tries to push them on me sometimes even though I'm clinically underweight) and my father has arthritis now because he played too much tennis when he was younger because "men need to keep in shape, that's just how the world is".

You'd be surprised how many people wreck their bodies with bad/fad diets and overexercise in the name of "health". This and the root navel-gazing body image issues are more of a general first-world problem though, a feature of populations that just need to just get out more and into raw nature; Hunt fauna, or something- like some primal beast. We all still have all these primitive instincts from long ago, and need to satisfy them somehow or they'll come out in odd ways... like playing sports.

[–]CleverFoolOfEarth 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That makes a lot of sense. Thank you for taking the time to provide a logical alternative explanation to my claim rather than simply calling me a liar or a lunatic. You are an intelligent and sensible man indeed and I wish you all the best in life.

[–]Mikulbleu 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I don’t believe you live in this reality.

[–]xanditAGAB (Assigned Gay at Birth) 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

i think this is satire

[–]CleverFoolOfEarth 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Nope, just an idea derived from observation and contemplation, as any other thought on the nature of the world is. I can see why you'd think it is strange, though, and would love to see evidence proving me wrong if anyone can provide it. I don't want to believe that such a large proportion of the population is rejecting a better life out of self-hatred, but... I have seen my parents. And my brother. And my Aunt Caroline. And the majority of my old classmates from high school.