Yes, I believe that heterosexism should continue to be the norm. The human body composition, that is the sexual body parts were made to be heterosexual. One part fits into another. Granted it is a person choice whom they chose to be with, the body was still made in a certain way.
If homosexuality skyrockets, the population would plummet or we would have an ageing population. Homosexual couples cannot procreate on their own so if homosexuality became the norm, where do you think the world would go?
I do NOT hate gay people but that does not stop me from disagreeing with homosexuality.
In terms of homosexuality, if everyone did this, the human race would surely die out in three hundred years tops. It's clear that the human anatomy of males and females compliment each other for means of procreation. Some argue that homosexuality is natural even for animals and occurs in many species. For one, comparison of behavioral traits to animals isn't very logical. If a human mother ate her own children (as gross as it is, but it does happen in nature with animals), no one would support her even if she said, "But animals do it, so I should be able to!". By that token, homosexual behavior in animals is not the same as how humans view it. Pro-gay humans view it as an alternative lifestyle to heterosexism, but animals do it for gratification. They do not favor taking a lifetime partner of the same sex, even if they occasionally have intercourse with a member of such. Although I don't believe in Darwin's theory of evolution, by that commonly accepted logic, wouldn't homosexuality be a counter-productive trait to procreation? This is from a more scientific standpoint, not a moralistic one.
How are babies made? A man and a woman have sex and the man fertilizes a woman's egg, in simplest terms. If 95% of people were homosexual, that would mean lots less children, decreases in the number of children globally, and eventually, the extinction of the human race due to the lack of new human beings, so why would that ever be useful?
Thats just how the body is biologically designed, and thats all there is to it. Less than 3% of the United State's population is homosexual, so heterosexuality is obviously the current "norm". God made people like this and thats the direction i believe society should continue to walk towards. . .
Hetero is around 95% of the populations. By just pure numbers this makes them normall i doubt the gay gene is going to take over soon. Heteronis also the thing that carried on life and has always been the norm. There are more of us than of then, hence the word normal.
This statement is an unfair one as heterosexism is not what’s truly being asked about. Heterosexualism is. Social norms develop because of societies changes, moral values, dominant beliefs, and the expectations of citizens. Choosing to focus on sexism of any sort being a social norm isn’t healthy and neither is labeling one’s self according to their bedroom activities (homosexuals should no more be labeled so because of having homosexual sex than heterosexuals should carry around that label heavily because they have heterosexual sex). The less emphasis we put on sexual activity in a society as being something that’s a forced norm or banned taboo, the less it will be a source of consternation for any group. Social norms will change (homosexuality and incest were once social norms in ancient kingdoms) and a person’s sexual activities should not be broadcast as a title that would define a social norm. If we’re going to start defining social norms sexually, then why don’t we start asking about when fetishisms and paraphilias are going to be social norms? Again, social norms will change on their own with the culture of a generation, not a sect’s rantings or a group’s demands. That is human nature and it should be allowed to work instead of interrupted and taking focus away from more important issues that we actually can actively change.
People do not choose to be gay or lesbian; they are born that way. It is a chemical imbalance. That being said, should gay people be seen as freaks and not normal? Not at all. They can't help being gay, and they should not apologize for it even if they could. This question is flawed. Heterosexism is seen as the norm because it is the norm. The majority of the population is, by default , heterosexual.
I support the movement for equal rights for those who identify as homosexual or bisexual. They deserve their rights just as much as I deserve mine. However, they are not the majority. There are many of us in this country who are heterosexual and we view and perceive the world as we see it. There is nothing wrong with perceiving the world from a heterosexism viewpoint.
Most people in the United States are white. That doesn't make white "normal" nor persons of color "abnormal." Most people in the United States have blue eyes rather than brown eyes, but both are normal eye variations. Just because someone is a minority does not make them "abnormal;" likewise, just because someone is a majority does not make them normal! Being queer is wholly natural--simply because there are more people who call themselves "straight" does not mean that they are more normal (unless you are going to also say that non-white skin color is "not normal.")
No, hetereosexism shouldn't necessarily be the norm, but neither should homosexuality. We can't choose who we love or who we have feelings for and, when we finally accept that, it'll make for a better society. There's no norm in the first place, if you ask me, and that's why all rights should be granted to all people.