ABSTRACT
Chapter 4 illustrated the signifi cance of historical patrilineal connections to the land in inscribing and shaping gender and class in farming. Specifi cally, Chapter 4 renders visible white heterosexual middle-class norms in constituting relations within farming families and among farming community members. These pervasive norms operate as ‘natural,’ thereby largely resisting interrogation. This chapter specifi cally attends to heterosexuality as it functions in a similar way to whiteness (see Chapters 2 and 3); that is, as natural, unquestioned, and permeating everyday practice and the institutional and structural dimensions of rural communities. Heterosexual relations are key organizing principles of rural societies, particularly agricultural societies, as these provide the foundation for reproducing the family farm and rural community (Little 2007; Little and Panelli 2007). In enunciating this position, authors have drawn on the work of feminist writers who have interrogated heterosexuality as gendered, socially produced, given meaning, institutionalized and performed in multiple ways in different places at different times. Theorists such as Stevi Jackson (2005a, b) and Dianne Richardson (2007) have challenged notions of a monolithic, compulsory heterosexuality, and visualized the concept of ‘heteronormativity’ to draw attention to the ways heterosexual norms are woven into institutional structures and everyday practices. In the last decade, rural scholarship has focused primarily on gay and lesbian identities, particularly because previously these had not been spoken of or explored in the rural context.
