ABSTRACT
Ingraham (1996) argues that the heterosexual imaginary is produced to veil the sociohistorical conditions that construct heterosexuality as a ‘natural’ practice, thereby foreclosing the possibility of (critically) exposing heterosexuality as an organising institution. It is our contention that academic research in marketing and consumer research has contributed to the circulation of the heterosexual imaginary. This is evident in the burgeoning body of work exploring (consumption) experiences of contemporary married women (Thompson, Locander, & Pollio, 1990), fathers (Bettany, Kerrane, & Hogg, 2014; Coskuner-Balli &Thompson, 2012; Eräranta&Moisander, 2011), working parents (Thompson, 1996), single parents (Harrison, Gentry, & Commuri, 2012) and mothers (Carrigan & Szmigin, 2004, 2006; Houston, 2004; The Voice Group, 2010; Thomsen & Sørensen 2006). Heterosexuality is often celebrated through gift-giving rituals (Ingraham, 1996; Sherry, 1983) that valorise familial and romantic exchange of love (Belk & Coon, 1993), dating experiences (Belk & Coon, 1990), Valentine’s Day (Otnes, Ruth, & Constance, 1994), Thanksgiving (Wallendorf & Arnould, 1991) and Christmas (Fischer & Arnold, 1990).
