User:English104h

Heterosexualization in society is the process in which individuals are conditioned to adopt heterosexual practices, by ignoring and suppressing their sexual feelings toward the same sex and then using these suppressed emotions towards the opposite gender. Society creates rules and regulations for gendered identities that establish a set construction of sexuality. Due to the overall societal institution, different adjectives define what is considered masculine and what is considered feminine. The feminine gender is usually associated with terms such as weaker, cowardly, sensitive, and compassionate, while masculinity is coupled with terms such as strong, brave, and independent. The idea that all men and women must conform to fit into these categories is the premise behind heterosexualization. Many feminists also use compulsory heterosexuality to describe the process of heterosexualization. “[Adrienne] Rich [a prominent feminist] was one of the first public intellectuals to challenge the idea that heterosexuality is the natural expression of human sexuality and that other forms of sexuality are deviant”. These other forms of sexuality include homosexuality. The idea of homophobia is a direct result of heterosexualization. The beginning of heterosexualization is widely debated, yet many see heterosexualization in sources as early as the New Testament continuing through ancient empires such as those of the Romans and Greeks. Beginning in the 1960’s, the LGBTQ liberation movement began and put sexual orientation in society more in the public eye. This caused society to become more aware of the process of heterosexualization.



Middle and High School Environments
The practice of heterosexualization has an influence on middle and high school environments by encouraging homophobia and bullying towards individuals who do not identify themselves as heterosexual or embrace a heterosexual existence. A survey conducted by the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN) reported that, “Sixty-four percent of LGBT students reported feeling unsafe at school”. Society’s exclusive conditioning of individuals to be strictly heterosexual leads to social and emotional problems for LGBT youth.

Homophobia
One of the most glaring drawbacks of heterosexualization is that it encourages homophobia. Individuals who are homophobic use heterosexualization to establish a comfortable environment for themselves. The apprehension some homophobes experience when they encounter homosexuals compels them to lash out against LGBT persons. Homosexual youth encounter this hostility on a regular basis during school in the form of bullying.

Bullying
Bullying is a huge issue for LGBT youth. They are exposed to verbal harassment from their peers, such as derogatory name calling, and physical abuse. Kathryn T. Roeck recalls an incident that took place at the high school her children attended where, “A young man was attacked by a group of male students, forcibly stripped of his clothing, and the word “fag” was written on his body in permanent black marker”. She came to the conclusion that “…schools are not a safe place for LGBT youth”. The verbal abuse homosexual youth encounter deals with being referred to as derogatory words. A survey conducted by the GLSEN found that, “An overwhelming majority (92 percent) of LGBT students reported frequently hearing homophobic slurs, such as 'faggot,' 'dyke,' or 'that's so gay'”.

Effects on Heterosexual Students
Heterosexualization in schools does not only affect LGBT youth; it can also have an impact on heterosexual students. A study conducted by Harris Interactive & the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network found that, “…of 3,450 public and private or parochial U.S. students (ages 13-18), 88% of the students said that homophobic remarks were used at least some times when teachers were present, and many students reported that teachers and staff did not intervene during these incidents”. Maria Valenti and Rebecca Campbell shared research done by their peers that states, “Most homophobic slurs come from other students, but as many as 25% of the harassers are faculty, staff, and administrators”. Research shows that it is damaging for heterosexual students to see LGBT youth mistreated in school because it encourages social problems, such as aggression, in adolescents. One study shows that, “…60% of those characterized as bullies in grades 6-9 had at least one criminal conviction by age 24”.

Effects on LGBT Youth
Many emotional problems can occur for homosexual youth as a result of the heterosexualization they encounter in school. According to Elizabeth McDermott, Katrina Roen, and Jonatha Scourfield, “International research has demonstrated a clear link between experiencing homophobic abuse, suffering negative psychological consequences, and engaging in self-destructive behaviours”. McDermott and her associates also went on to cite C. Bagley and P. Tremblay, individuals who have done research on this subject, who state that, “Recent North American and New Zealand studies of large populations reveal that young LGBT people can have rates of suicide attempts at least four times those of their heterosexual counterparts”. Along with the normal challenges young people face, such as dealing with becoming an adult and learning to be responsible, mature individuals, LGBT youth encounter the psychological distress of being socially isolated. The social isolation homosexual youth face causes them to feel shame which can lead to drug abuse, unsafe sexual practices, self-loathing, drinking, and self harm. Although some of the negative effects caused by heterosexualization may not be as extreme as those mentioned above (some teens avoided school by ditching or dropping out, running away from home, or becoming depressed) most, if not all, of the consequences of heterosexualization made the process of moving into adulthood very difficult for LGBT youth.

Effects on Faculty and Staff
Faculty and staff members are also susceptible to the negativity caused by heterosexualization. Some students try to counteract the damage done by heterosexualization by creating a Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA) club. According to Valenti and Campbell, “Emerging research suggests that GSA involvement by LGBT youth greatly increase their positive interaction with the school”. In order for this club to exist a member of the faculty or staff at the school has to become the advisor for the club. Through research, Valenti and Campbell discovered that becoming a GSA advisor was a very difficult decision for many teachers. The fear of losing their jobs, being accused of recruiting youth to a gay lifestyle, and the loss of credibility or the ability to gain tenure were some of the worries many advisors faced before deciding to be in charge of a GSA group. The research conducted by Valenti and Campbell suggests that the practice of heterosexualization has the ability to instill fear even in individuals who are not LGBT.

Digital Media
Main Article: Digital Media Homosexuality blossomed privately until its introduction to the screen. This began the dependant relationship heterosexualization has with homosexuality in the media. The general population showed obvious disapproval of the new homosexual themes and images. The motivation to reveal homosexuality sparked the switch to heterosexualize all homosexuality in media. AIDS forced homosexuality into the media, which forced the heterosexual response. At first television networks tried avoiding the topic of AIDS in order to avoid the discussion of gays, but as more and more people contracted the disease, more and more homosexuals revealed their sexual orientation. AIDS became so widespread that to not air its story was irresponsible. Homosexuals immediately felt discrimination as their heterosexual neighbors displayed disgust publically through national news reports. Gay men were blamed for the terrible STD. This coverage continued the branding of homosexuals as outcasts.

Film
Film started to incorporate lesbian scenes into the genre of teen movies. This seemed like a victory for the homosexual community, but the lesbian scenes were masked with heterosexualization. This masking takes a few forms. One common form is the use of luscious lesbian characters. These characters are typically played by attractive and voluptuous women, who men would obviously desire. Their style of dress usually aligns itself with heterosexual women. Clothing appears sexy, skimpy, and tight fitting. Ann M. Ciasullo and Tricia Jenkins argue that this representation excludes a majority of lesbians who identify with the butch image. The absence of the butch image heterosexualizes these lesbian characters. Examples of this situation are present in Anger Management, Not Another Teen Movie, Wild Things, Cruel Intentions, and American Pie 2. Another form exists in the circumstance that homosexuality is placed. Producers often put lesbianism in scenes that cater to heterosexual male fantasies. The action of kissing between two luscious lesbians arouses many men and is a classic fantasy shared among heterosexual males. The knowledge of this and the portrayal of its success in movies encourages women to perform the same actions in order to attract men, completing the goal of heterosexualization.

Sitcoms
Sitcoms introduced homosexual characters in the early 90’s. Characters are heterosexualized in some of the same forms that films use, but they are often more emphasized because of the length of time plot has to develop. Heterosexualization occurs when the roles of gay and lesbian characters are minimal and therefore second hand to heterosexual characters. Homosexual characters are also placed in heterosexual contexts in order to deemphasize homosexuality. One example of this is Will Truman’s character in the show Will and Grace. Marisa Connolly, argues that Will and Grace shows heterosexualization by surrounding Will in a heterosexual context. This context includes living with a very close, best friend, Grace Adler and having no successful relationships with men. Audiences have naturally adopted the idea that the relationship between Will and Grace is one of a married couple.

Cartoons
Cartoons exhibit heterosexualization through a shift in aired shows. Before the era of awareness of homosexuality, male-male relationships in cartoons did not in any way seem to influence a child’s sexual orientation. Yogi Bear concentrates on the male-male relationship between Yogi Bear and Boo Boo. Pinky and the Brain was another highly successful cartoon revolving around a male-male relationship. Pinky and Brain lived together and eventually raised a child together. They led a perfectly homosexual life according to Jeffery Dennis. The cartoon itself was anything but heterosexualized. Heterosexualization took place not on screen, but in the choice of TV networks. As awareness grew, so did the consciousness of producers. Male-male relationships slowly faded out and were replaced by male-female relationships. Examples of cartoons used in replacement are: Doug, Hey Arnold, The Wild Thornberries, and The Fairly Odd Parents. In later cartoons, heterosexualization started to appear in script. Homosexuality became the bud of jokes, imposing negative connotations on it. This fashion of heterosexualization is more accessible in cartoons especially because of the humorous context. Audiences find this form of heterosexualization in shows like The Simpsons and South Park.