- Don't worry, this isn't a straight pride video.
Anyone who is screaming straight pride is homophobic
and an idiot and doesn't have an ounce of self awareness.
June is Pride month and normally there would be
loads of celebrations all around the country,
but unfortunately, Corona Virus
and whilst that means that you may not be able to
go out and march, protest, celebrate, party,
however you normally celebrate Pride, Pride is not cancelled.
Whilst it's a great time to celebrate the LGBTQ+ community,
it's also a great time to remind ourselves
of the history of Pride.
Pride was a protest.
It started as LGBTQ+ people
fighting for their basic human rights
and we must acknowledge that one of the major tipping points
in queer history was the Stonewall riots,
which was started by queer and trans women of colour.
Storme DeLaverie, Sylvia Rivera and Marsha P. Johnson
were key players in the Stonewall riots.
Now, I'm straight, so I can't speak on LGBTQ+ issues
from personal experience,
but you know what I can talk about?
Heterosexuality, so there's that.
So yes, we are going to talk about heterosexuality
in this video, which may seem counterintuitive
for a Pride month video, but we're going to talk about
the systemic issues behind why protests and riots and Pride
is necessary in the first place.
So I've been familiar with heteronormativity
for a while now, but only recently I came across the concept
of compulsory heterosexuality,
so we're gonna talk about what that is, why that is
and the impact of it.
Before we begin, if you haven't subscribed already,
please do.
I'm Hannah and I make content about sex and relationships
on this channel, every week.
So the term compulsory heterosexuality (laughing).
Why can't I say this?
So the term compulsory heterosexuality
was coined by Adrienne Rich in her 1980 essay,
"Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence."
Now, moving forwards, I'm just gonna say comphet
because I can't for the life of me
say compulsory heterosexuality, I just,
my mouth can no longer say it, comphet,
so now you know what I'm talking about, great.
So in her essay, Rich argues that heterosexuality,
especially in women, is not natural.
Heterosexuality is, in fact, a violent political institution
imposed on society and it's people.
Comphet removes the capacity of choice and self expression
and puts women in a subordinate role to men.
Now you might be thinking comphet is bad,
but it's can't be that bad, surely,
so let's unpack some shit.
Quick disclaimer before we continue,
when I'm talking about comphet,
I'm mostly referring to romantic and sexual orientation,
but this goes much deeper and I'm basically just gonna read
what I wrote in my notes, as a disclaimer.
(clearing throat)
So this is the norm that comphet assumes and enforces,
which we'll get onto later.
"Romantic and sexual relationships
"must happen between two people, no more, no less
"and those two people must be a cis straight man
"and a cis straight woman.
"They must only have penis in vagina sex
"and only with each other,
"an average of three times per week.
"They must only fantasise about penis in vagina sex
"with each other.
"No masturbation, no porn, no cross dressing,
"oh and be married of course.
"Even if you only diverge from one thing on the long list
"of normative ideals, sexual behaviours and desires,
"you are deviant."
So that's my definition of normative behaviours.
It really is a very strict box and can make all of us
feel wrong, but let's continue
'cause aren't we having a great time?
So comphet is the assumption that heterosexuality
is the default sexual orientation,
everyone can adopt heterosexuality
despite their actual preferences
and heterosexuality is assumed until proven otherwise.
Comphet is responsible for the forced participation
in the coming out process.
Heck, it's responsible for the existence
of the coming out process.
So this all sounds pretty similar
to heteronormativity, right?
And so this is my personal interpretation
of what makes comphet different.
So in comphet, heterosexuality isn't just assumed,
it's enforced.
It is a system of oppression.
You will find rewards for heterosexuality
and punishments for any other sexual orientation
in all institutions, legal, political, financial, medical,
religious, educational, social, the list goes on
and of course, this extends to gender, gender roles
and gender expression too.
Any deviance from man equals masculine
and woman equals feminine is punished
in these same institutions too
and it's manifestations aren't just external
in these institutions, they are very much internal too.
Internalised homophobia is the most obvious one,
but when you're denied self determination
and alternatives to heterosexuality are never presented
as real, positive options to you, you may actually believe
that you are straight, even if you aren't.
It means that people even assume
their own sexual orientation.
It prevents people from ever truly considering
their sexual orientation, giving it a second thought,
exploring behaviours outside
of the heteronormative experience, or if you do,
feeling guilt and shame about that.
Now, shame is powerful.
Pride isn't just synonymous with gay party,
pride is the opposite of shame.
Comphet also has intersections with racism.
In an essay on African American history
and compulsory heterosexuality, Mattie Udora Richardson
talks about how any divergences from social norms
bring accusations of savagery, pathology and deviance
upon black people.
Because we've got two types of systemic oppression here,
comphet and racism and because comphet is seen as the norm,
any deviations from it just add to the racist nonesense
that black people are animalistic
and the over-sexualization of black women.
And although Adrienne Rich's original essay
was about the lesbian experience,
comphet doesn't just affect queer women, oh no!
Comphet grooms men into aggressively pursuing women,
whether they want to or not,
whether they pursue women or not,
not whether or not they want to be aggressive.
♪ Be aggressive be be aggressive ♪
I was playing poker last night and that was my chant.
And this may lead to a lot of confused gay boys,
but also, a lot of nasty pickup artists and misogynists.
Comphet creates a society in which not only homophobia,
but toxic masculinity can flourish.
So comphet is bad, but it's also complicated
and institutionalised, so what the fuck do we do?
As LGBTQ+ visibility increases,
we start to challenge and dismantle comphet
and heteronormativity and this visibility
is in our day to day lives, in our politicians,
in our celebrities, in the media that we consume,
that's why representation is so important.
One thing that this has made me think about is that
people with any sexual preference
different to heterosexuality potentially spend
a lot more time thinking about and interrogating
those thoughts and feelings.
They're really, really putting in the work
to understand themselves and their sexuality.
Straight people don't do that.
We've all been given this cookie cutter experience
and if you don't fit in it, you start to question things,
you start to think about things a bit differently,
but if you do fit in it, then you're like,
"Great, wonderful, no further questions."
And I think this leads to a lot of straight people
never really thinking about, or considering,
or interrogating their own sexuality
and it creates this rigidity of sexual orientation.
Comphet doesn't allow anyone to be fluid,
so let's challenge these institutions, politics,
the entertainment industry, religious, et cetera
and also challenge the assumptions you have
about other people and the ones you have about yourself
and whatever you find in there, you should be proud.
Happy Pride month everyone, especially my LGBTQ+ viewers.
Thank you so much for watching and I would love to hear
your thoughts on this topic in the comments
and thanks for watching again,
I'll see you in my next video, bye!
You must be straight!