This Just in, According to the BBC, ‘Heterosexuality’ Was ‘Invented’ in 1934—any Questions?
…I should note up front that this piece first appeared in 2017, but has been making the rounds on social media again. I’m glad it is because it unintentionally shines a spotlight on our gaslight culture that the author did not intend, almost certainly because he has so thoroughly gaslit himself.
…That’s because heterosexuality has always just been there. How humans choose to define it with a specific mouth sound is completely irrelevant.
By Mike Miller | Mar 20, 2022
…So suggests BBC Future in (Link): an article titled “The Invention of ‘Heterosexuality.” Shall we dig in?
The 1901 Dorland’s Medical Dictionary defined heterosexuality as an “abnormal or perverted appetite toward the opposite sex.”
More than two decades later, in 1923, Merriam Webster’s dictionary similarly defined it as “morbid sexual passion for one of the opposite sex.”
It wasn’t until 1934 that heterosexuality was graced with the meaning we’re familiar with today: “manifestation of sexual passion for one of the opposite sex; normal sexuality.”
And there you have it, boys and girls.
The author then opined, “Whenever I tell this to people, they respond with dramatic incredulity. That can’t be right! Well, it certainly doesn’t feel right. It feels as if heterosexuality has always “just been there.”
Um, maybe because heterosexuality has always just been there?
I mean, not to get all science-y and stuff, but if heterosexuality has not always just been there — heterosexual desire, as it were — where did all the people come from who were (are) not heterosexual? I’m being facetious, but, I mean, yeah.
Au contraire, per the author: “Heterosexuality has not always ‘just been there.’ And there’s no reason to imagine it will always be.” Sorry pal, I — and billions of my heterosexual friends — beg to differ; based entirely on my earlier, non-science-y observation about procreation and the beginning of mankind. And stuff.
The author then goes off on a long narrative about the differences between heterosexuality and reproductive intercourse, with which I’m not going to waste column space, but suffice it to say he views “sexual instincts” and “cultural production” as non-mutually-inclusive. See what I mean?
The article delves painstakingly into sexuality through the 1800s and early 20th century. Again, click on the link and read the whole damn thing if you choose; I just don’t recommend the time sink.
…Seriously, though, how long before this insanity makes its way into America’s public education system? God knows it wouldn’t be the first example of an attempt to program young kids. And it is soooo quintessentially leftist; it’s not enough to accept and treat with respect the LGBTQIA community (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex, asexual, and agender). The radical left must attack and ultimately destroy heterosexuality.
Oh, and any questions? Yeah, I got nothin’.
The bottom line:
Live and let live. Just don’t force yours on mine, and I won’t force mine on yours.