Please Stop This "Heteronormative" Crap

Source: Property of Stormberry

By the end of last month my mind was blown, and blown BIG. I had read the book Playing With Fire by Lawrence O'Donnell and... wow, just... wow. Honestly, after having read Fear by Bob Woodward, I thought it would have take me time to find another great book, but then came Mr. O'Donnell, and blew every other book I have read this year out of the water.

After such an impressive book, I clearly needed a mind-eraser, otherwise I could not be fair to my next reading. Every other book ever written was bound to pale in comparison with this one, or so I felt at the moment. So, I did what I usually do, and picked up myself some free gay romance. You know, something light and funny to bring my brain back from the wonderful depths of the previous book.

--- Oh yes, Playing with Fire is a book about American politics and what went on during the election campaing where Richard Nixon became president. Just in case you were wondering.

Anyway, the point is that I picked up a gay romance book to lighten up my head. I didn't want to pay for it, so I picked something from my sampled in Kindle that I knew I could borrow for free. I had been spending handsomely, so yes, I needed a free eraser. I picked some book that seemed to be good on it's cover. I actually read the sample I had and it was... well, it was bad, but didn't look that bad. Well, it was that bad.

That was three days ago, and I'm still on 20% of it, and I rather pick up a reading in German or do homework than read that crap.

Aside from all the fakery, and those annoying cliches and tropes of "oblivious of attraction", and "erections are actually alarms of the proximity of true love", and the detailed physical description, because love only happens to hot people, AND "hot people are oblivious of their good looks", one thing that got me murderous was this need to force the reader to believe that "true love" looks like toxic relationships and last century's heterosexual, gender role defined marriages.

Things like suggesting that lack of jealousy is a sign of lack of love because (literally), a person's lover is a possession and people should be viciously possessive of their lovers, or else they don't really care. Or, the idea that a true, lasting, real relationship needs a partner that's leading and protective and another that's homely, loves to cook, clean and has a nurturing personality. A lot of gay romance novels fall into this trope of one character taking the traditional role of a homemaker, cookie-cut from a Good Housewife magazine from the 50's, that go far and beyond even what an average person with a homemaking inclination might be doing.

Novels often do point out that the character has this inclination, has always wanted to be a homemaker, BUT the overabundance of it is what becomes troublesome. This gives the idea that love can only exist in this frame, like two people who like to be together, but also like to have independent lives, or neither likes to do any house chores, or maybe both like to travel all the time, are not fit to become a long term, serious, established couple.

And also, love only exist in pairs. There only one One, and you are lucky if you find it, and forever unhappy if you don't. All relationships are and should be aimed to form a family. Relationships are only successful when there is exclusivity, they live together and have or plan to have children. And are jealous! That's important. If there is no jealousy, no seeing your significant other as a thing to be own, and which can be stolen, then there is no love. Forget anything else: no jealousy, no love.

Now, this (take or leave the jealousy) is often refered to (as far as I know), as heteronormative, as if the normal of heterosexual relationships is to live in an asphyxiating, toxic relationship, aimed to oppress one half and exploit the other. Oh yes, you read that right. IF the couple agrees to be monogam, and they both choose, by their own free will, because they like it, to lead a relationship where one stays at home and takes upon a homemaking role, while the other brings home the daily bread, so be it, BUT not everybody is cut for that, and so, by declaring it a "norm" you expect every other heterosexual person to squeeze themselves into either being forced to support all by themselves a family (this role is socially assigned to men, so the couple isn't supposed to choose who takes care of this), while the other is to give up any hope and dream of personal or artistic realisation (or of any other nature, unless it is church related), and devote to having kids and taking care of the house - role by default assigned to women.

Gay romance writers (often women) who buy into this idea, force their stories to choose a man and a woman in a pair of men, and though they are both men, one becomes "more man", but becoming aggressive, protective and often possessive in a violent manner, while the other is the "designated" woman, and by that necessarily, more dramatic, MOTHERLY protective, and a homemaker. And his jealousy (remember, jealousy = love), is expressed in the form of scene making and drama and crying in pajamas over a pint of ice cream and a glass of wine, with the besties.

However, and outside all "heteronormative" (I hate that word), there is the idea that mistreatment is actually the victim's fault because instead of getting away of the person harming them, they should "understand" them, and help them heal. Really?

Now, let's take a look at this. To me, this talks about veiled homophobia, because actually there is no acceptance of the concept of love outside the narrow box allowed and prescribed to heterosexual couples. That, just to start, because with the toppling of all that toxicity, including the apology of toxic masculinity and the glorifying of "toxic love" (which is no love), abusive relationships are justified and normalized as that's what love is. People who don't "enjoy" it and rejoice in it, are the problem.

Now, please let's stop this trend. Love has many faces and many flavors and many wazs to be expressed, but none of them include disrespect, mistreatment, miscommunication, harrassment, bullying, violence, threats of violence, manipulation, demand of sacrifice - even when it is demanded indrectly, as something you should be doing by yourself, out of love, or anything that makes any partner uncomfortable.

Love is respectful and gentle. Love happens between people of any gender, any race, any creed and age (as long as they are LEGAL!). Love involves consent. Full, disclaimed, unmistakable consent. Love isn't just monogamous either. Love can happen to a person by themselves, but also to more than two. Love doesn't equal living together and raising a family. Love can be casual. Love can also be temporary. Love is not a life insurance, a fixed income, a source of validation, a stamp of proven maturity.

The day all romance authors actually discover that, the world will be a better place, because people will stop feeding toxicity, and placing disproportionate expectations on the shoulders of others.