ABSTRACT
This chapter is the first of two devoted to exploring ‘the politics of hetero-
normativity’. Heteronormativity has quite recently emerged as a fully
shaped and well-theorised concept in fields from gender studies, to literature, to film theory, and, while still little referenced in political science, this
concept proves central to sexual politics and the politics of sexuality.1
‘Heteronormativity’ denotes the normative power of heterosexuality in both
society and politics. Following the literal invention of ‘heterosexuality’ – a
term introduced in the 19th century, and only after the coining of homo-
sexuality – social norms, political practices and legal structures all devel-
oped to produce a practical truth that at the time was merely presumed
(Katz 1995). This ‘truth’ is the idea that heterosexuality is the ‘normal’ or ‘natural’ way through which human physical and social experience must be
lived. Heteronormativity constructs not only the natural domain of hetero-
sexual practices and relations, but also the attendant realm of denigrated or
despised sexualities, relationship forms and identities – particularly homo-
sexuality and other putative threats to ‘the family’ (Foucault 1978; Evans
1993; Butler 1993; Fausto-Sterling 2000). Thus heteronormativity could be
taken as a political concept that draws attention to those deviant, abjected
or marginalised individuals who are somehow stigmatised or discriminated against by the dominant sexual norm. However, to read heteronormativity
in this way would be to reduce it to a problem soluble by liberal tolerance.
It would, on this reading, add little if anything to a rich tradition and a
vibrant literature in political thought that calls on us to include the exclu-
ded, to defend the rights of the marginalised, to uphold the human dignity
of those rendered abject.2
