The non-heterosexual outcasts

Sexual orientation is, in many respects, a very sensitive topic for great number of people. Richard McAnulty and M. Michele Burnette (2003) define sexual orientation as “a person’s erotic and romantic attraction to one or both sexes.” As a sociologist, I can say that it has become a lot easier to have discussions, as well as teach students about the subject of sexual orientation.
Having read a considerable amount of the literature, I have found that there are numerous inconsistencies and debates to answer the “why” question. Given the very strong views, quite honestly, there is no easy or maybe even right way to broach such a discussion.

When talking about sexual orientation, I find that it’s important to have somewhat of a knowledge base that allows you to speak intelligently or at least have some verified evidence rather than simply rambling on with unfounded information. There are tons of reading materials surrounding the topic that provides insight into how and why groups exist that do not identify with heteronormative society (simply put, the doctrine that people within the “norm” are attracted to women and vice versa—women are attracted to men). Those groups that are outside the norm (or deviant) include individuals that are homosexual, bisexual, or asexual.

To provide a very general overview, homosexuals are individuals that are romantically and erotically attracted to people of the same sex. Bisexuals are romantically and erotically attracted to both men and women. Asexual refers to the absence of romantic or erotic desires—attracted to neither men nor women. Deliberations continue arguing whether a person is born homosexual, bisexual or asexual or if some traumatic event occurred in their lives that triggered the onset.

Society determines the norm and what is deviant. To be anything other than heterosexual, by society’s standards, is deviant. Sexual orientation is a subject that even government officials as high as the President of the United States has weighed-in on. President Bush has been very candid about beliefs on same-sex marriages. Though it is not directly related to sexual orientation, it is certainly indicative of his attitude and beliefs about non-heterosexuality. This moral entrepreneur has been instrumental in the development of laws related to non-heterosexual cultures.

As a result of society’s extremely negative connotations and views of homosexuals, bisexuals, and asexuals, these groups are the outcasts of mainstream society simply because of their attractions. Some stay “in the closet” in hopes of avoiding the associated stereotypes and labels. A large portion of parents with non-heterosexual children have disowned them. My question to society and to parents alike is, “Why does it matter?”

I’ve become somewhat immune to some things that should probably be shocking in this country. I’ve driven through the streets of New Orleans and saw tents where people live—not a place where they campout for the night, but where they live. I’ve seen people living under bridges, people actively seeking work and can’t find it, mothers unable to care for their children and can’t get assistance from the government for one reason or another, and children that are physically, mentally, and sexually abused. The poor and elderly die from common illnesses, while many of the insured make full recoveries. A host of other weightier social problems exist that should almost cause us to forget about sexual orientation.

Some people resort to readings in religious doctrines not only to explain the right or wrong of non-heterosexuality, but to justify disowning a child. I say to those people that your reading is incomplete. It isn’t a matter of whether I condone it or not, I simply have things much more important that I want to accomplish, as well as to be known for when I depart this life. Besides, I only have one life to live and deciding how others ought to live theirs…I’m not interested. © 2008 Keydron Guinn