Heterosexual?
Not that there’s anything wrong with that!
Wouldn’t it be just awful if young girls watching Disney movies turned out to be normal?
These people are fully pushing the agenda that gender and sexuality are two different things. Gender and “normal” sexuality or sexual identity are indivisible. Anything other than that is abnormal.
This is a bad thing?
97%+ of people are hetero, dare I say normal, sexually, and these people want children's movies to reflect otherwise?
This kind of stuff really ticks me off but it goes to show that those promoting the homosexual agenda know they have to push it, hell; recruit, to increase their numbers and acceptance.
I thought it wasn’t a choice.
The authors are hypersensitivelystupid.
Gee, little girls growing up normal....
Guess they want to corrupt their minds early on to make it easier to turn them later....
As McCain points out, if you're a male who likes or lusts after women, you're just another male oppressor of women. But if you criticize the sex industry and prostitutes, strippers, porn stars, you're still an oppressor for criticizing "sex workers" and denying females sexual and career fulfillment. You awful male oppressors of women, you.
Those films are popular for that very reason, because the girls are already normal.
They're presuming that the girls are not and that the films encourage heterosexuality.
Idiots.
Isn’t that the very definition of “G rated”?
Wait...wasn’t there just a study that finally proved all this gender-bender stuff was hogwash?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3195117/posts
Why wouldn’t a woman naturally desire a hunky manservant who goes out and makes money, comes home and builds things and fixes things for her, provides sperm to create children in her and, should she find him unsatisfactory, she can sue him for at least half his income and throw him out of the house he built/bought while she stays there with the kids?
So you have to cook, clean, change a few diapers and pretend he’s a great lover. Ladies, is that such a bad tradeoff?
It's called "sanity", thank you.
Yep, you’ve already heard of “White Privilege”, well “Hetero Privilege” isn’t far behind.
I'm not sure that that is a real word.
Um... Good.
These liberal “professors” are getting more idiotic every year.
??
98% were going to be straight no matter what the pushers pushed on them
It is. It is all of those things.
Specifically, within heteronormativity, homosexuality becomes the “other” against which heterosexuality defines itself.
No, it does not. Homosexuality, however, absolutely does need heterosexuality to define itself as any tiny minority does with the norm. The 98% heterosexual population has not declared itself the norm, it simply is the norm. That isn't a social construct, it's a mathematical description.
Heteronormativity also rests on gender asymmetry, as heterosexuality depends on a particular type of normatively gendered women and men.
Apparently this is a sentence that is intended to convey a meaning but if there ever was semantic content it's been wrung out of the words by jargon. The author, if I may so abuse the term, has not considered that it isn't any sort of "normativity" that depends on heterosexuality, but the entire existence of the human race. One thing that is a simple biological fact demonstrates this: every one of these hatred-choked, diction-challenged academic pontificators had a father. Every one. That, my dears, is, dare I say it? NORMAL.