Can anyone explain queer heterosexuality to me?

[featherland]

I have noticed over the last few months / years more and more people I know on Facebook identifying themselves as queer, even though they are in heteronormative relationships.

For example, I went to a friend's wedding. It was very traditional - big white gown, all male speeches etc. she has been with her husband since she was a teenager and never (publicly) been in a relationship with a woman. She describes herself as femme and queer - and often posts photos of herself looking very beautiful and typically 'feminine' (makeup, pretty clothes ..) describing herself as such, with loads of pride emoticons.

I just .. Don't get it? I understand the desire to reject gender norms and heteronormativity. But surely those of us who are straight and in monogamous relationships can't just claim the word queer when we receive (willingly or not) all the social privileges of being straight?

And I can understand wanting to stand in solidarity with LGBTQ people. But don't we need to change heteronormative society rather than muscle in on the spaces created by and for people who are marginalised? Eg I am not married, mainly because I can't reconcile myself with the patriarchal history of marriage. I don't see that doing heteronormative tings and saying that you aren't is really queer? If there is such a thing as queer heterosexuality shouldn't it be about living in non normative ways?

What official forms require you to state your sexual preferences?
Most recent one was signing up for some work training. Also job applications etc. It's on the equality monitoring bits of most forms

They asked - they did not require you to reply.

featherland

I don't think people are going out of their way to pick a fight with you. It's true, people don't always read every single comment, just answer the OP.

There are lots of threads on FWR that have this flavour.

People will challenge assertions and opinions. It's the nature of the boards. I've had my opinion challenged, often.

I explain why I think something, but keep an open mind.

A robust challenging of opinion and viewpoints isn't personal.

Featherland, people are not picking a fight. They're discussing your ideas, which is presumably what you wanted them to do when you started the thread.

Some of the things you have said are pretty controversial, so of course they will be discussed.

Regardless of whether feather comes back or not, she has raised some interesting points.

Terms like lesbian aren't just used for political reasons to indicate oppression.

It is very unlikely that we are ever going to live in a world where there are as many women who are sexually and romantically attracted to women as there are to men.

As that is the case, lesbians are always going to have to develop their own culture and social relationships so that they have greater opportunities to meet each other and form romantic and/or sexual relationships.

Socially identifying as a lesbian has many positive benefits for lesbians. It's not solely or primarily a political statement.

They asked - they did not require you to reply.

Sorry, I missed the "require" part. Don't Mumsnet on very little sleep I always fill them out. No point me lying and putting "straight" on there

I meant you can just ignore it- no need to lie or fill anything in.

I have to give out NHS monitoring forms to service users in my workplace and many of the questions are very personal, however there is a prefer not to say check box for every question - I thought that was standard for most forms of this nature?

But I don't know why I'd need to tick "prefer not to say"? I'm quite happy to put that I'm bisexual on the forms, in the same way that I'm happy to say I'm female and white British and speak Welsh.

If other people want to tick "prefer not to say" that's their choice, but I don't mind filling them out. Not sure why that's a problem?

Your post was in reply to my question about why is it necessary to disclose one's sexuality. Your post gave me the impression you thought there was some sort of requirement to provide this information on "official forms"

There isn't. The information is asked for (for various reasons, all of which will almost certainly be completely irrelevant to the main purpose of the form) but your answer, or non-answer, will have no bearing whatsoever on whether the form is processed.

I'm quite happy to put that I'm bisexual on the forms, in the same way that I'm happy to say I'm female and white British and speak Welsh.

You are?

I always feel a bit queasy about filling out things on forms that they don't need to know.

Other than in a medical context, why would they need to know I am female? Why would they need to know my sexual orientation?

One of the first things the nazi regime did was requiring Jews to change their passports to declare their Jewishness.

Someone might want to know those things for legitimate reasons of statistics, etc, but whenever I have to reveal that I am a member of an oppressed class, I get suspicious.

Still do it, most of the time, as you just don't have a choice, and my name is obviously female anyway, but I think I would be even more wary of giving them information that they cannot just see by looking at me. Like sexual orientation. I'm hetero, so am safe, but if I was lesbian, I don't know if I would want this to be on some paper in some government database.

Overies
None of it's a problem if you want to give the info, I was just trying to clarify for anyone who might be wondering that for most forms of that type it's not mandatory to fill in any questions that service users might find too personal.

"kinder egg"
😂😂😂

Exactly terry there may in some cases be a statistical justification but it's not mandatory.

I don't feel queasy providing this information, it's more I just think it's none of their business. (Although I do like telling any Scottish government forms that I'm British not Scottish and always tick no religion)

I know there are often valid reasons, but I still have an image of the daily fail getting hold of it and releasing selective parts based on who they want to vilify that day.

I don't like telling forms I am disabled

I'm especially uncomfortable telling the DWP in minute detail, but I need to eat!!

FOR ANYONE WONDERING WHAT IT MEANS TO BE "QUEER HETEROSEXUAL," it means that the heterosexual relationship is non-conforming, or deviant, than that of the social construct of traditional heterosexual relationships. It has nothing to do with identifying with a different sexual identity, gender, or sex, and is not for attention. BASICALLY, this can be translated to present-time society, in which we are seeing both men and women - in heterosexual relationships - exchanging masculine and feminine characteristics. For example, in present time heterosexual relationships we are seeing men open up more, or learning to embrace their emotional side (this can be considered a queer heterosexual relationship). We are also seeing more women taking "male" stances in male dominant careers, and are moving away from the traditional ideologies that women are supposed to be docile and sensitive individuals, and men are supposed to be strong masculine individuals. So for everyone else who didn't know what the term meant, YOU ARE PROBABLY IN A QUEER HETEROSEXUAL RELATIONSHIP. There is nothing wrong with it, it's just another name to describe a progressive relationship.

My credibility includes: B.A. in Women and Gender Studies, B.A. in Mass Comm; Feminist (meaning wanting equality and freedom for ALL, not just females.)

Is queer similar to what used to be called 'bicurious'? kind of, open to anything? I'm confused.. is that because the word has become so broad/vague as to have lost it's meaning?

Am I missing something or is that just a description of most people’s relationships?

So it's a heterosexual relationship for navel gazers then, thanks for clearing that up.

Oh god, someone spent a long time introducing queer theory to me; it's just semantics. Yes, normal relationships.

For example, in present time heterosexual relationships we are seeing men open up more, or learning to embrace their emotional side (this can be considered a queer heterosexual relationship). We are also seeing more women taking "male" stances in male dominant careers

Like how it was in the 18th century when men indulged their emotions by crying at funerals and weddings and such and through writing or reading emotional poetry... and wearing flamboyant colours how very "queer".

Or in the 20's when Coco Chanel designed houte couture trousers for women, which were immensely popular, all those "queer" women, hey.

Or in the WW decades where women whose husbands were sent to war ended up doing the "men's" work themselves and did it very well in fact. They were obviously all "queer"

Also the 60's where men exploring their emotional side through music and the arts and abandoning conventional dress codes for men like short hair, they were all obviously "queer".

Any woman ever who has challenged conventions around gender are labelled "queer" now.

The only modern element to this ideology is how it forces people into a box labelled "queer" rather than simply an individual maybe gender non-conforming or challenging gender norms which has happened since time immemorial. This is very regressive, insulting and ridiculous. Gender norms change over time. They should just be eradicated.

Feminist (meaning wanting equality and freedom for ALL, not just females.)

No, that's something else. Humanitarian?

Feminism is about the liberation of women. All women, and by that I mean adult human females.

You can be a feminist and also support other good causes promoting equality and freedom for disadvantaged groups of men, too. They aren't mutually exclusive. But feminism itself has a meaning, and it is for and about women.

Queer theory is nonsense, and I say that as someone with a social science MA, if that makes one more credible. According to your definition, virtually every heterosexual relationship is queer, except for maybe a few very religious conservative types.

As I understand it queer means a heterosexual person who dyes their hair purple and stomps about the place hoping people will look at them and think they are interesting.

I’ll be off to tell my elderly mother she was in a queer relationship until my dad died, seeing as he cried and cooked and she did diy. I’m sure she’ll be thrilled.

FOR ANYONE WONDERING WHAT IT MEANS TO BE "QUEER HETEROSEXUAL," it means that the heterosexual relationship is non-conforming, or deviant, than that of the social construct of traditional heterosexual relationships. It has nothing to do with identifying with a different sexual identity, gender, or sex, and is not for attention. BASICALLY, this can be translated to present-time society, in which we are seeing both men and women - in heterosexual relationships - exchanging masculine and feminine characteristics. For example, in present time heterosexual relationships we are seeing men open up more, or learning to embrace their emotional side (this can be considered a queer heterosexual relationship).

Oh FFS.

This makes me want to scream!!!

There are many ways in which DP and I are non-conforming or "deviant" wrt gender norms. It doesn't make us queer. It makes us human.

It'd be a fucking insult to my lesbian and gay friends to call myself queer because I'm the breadwinner and DP is in touch with his feelings or somesuch.

But also, this makes me angry as it's also framing sexist stereotypes as the norm, instead of encouraging everyone to break out of them. Regressive bullshit.