Heterosexuality

Lore & Background

The noun came into wider use from the early 1920s, but did not enter common use until the 1960s.

Reader's Guide

Heterosexuality is significant as the most prevalent sexual orientation across cultures, with the vast majority of individuals being sexually predisposed exclusively to the other sex. Scientists do not know the exact cause of sexual orientation, but they theorize it is caused by a complex interplay of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences, and do not view it as a choice. There is considerably more evidence supporting nonsocial, biological causes of sexual orientation than social ones, especially for males. The term straight originated as a mid-20th century gay slang term for heterosexuals, ultimately coming from the phrase 'to go straight' (as in 'straight and narrow'), or stop engaging in homosexual sex. Some object to usage of the term straight because it implies that non-heterosexual people are crooked. Heterosexual behavior is observed in all other mammals and in other animals, as it is necessary for sexual reproduction. The legacy of heterosexuality includes its role as a normative category in society, though its definition has evolved from a medical term for 'morbid' passion to a descriptor of normal sexuality.

Did You Know?

• While heterosexual behavior is common across many animal species, it is not universal—many species also exhibit homosexual behavior, and some reproduce asexually.

Origins and the Core Political Thesis

Rich challenged the prevailing assumption in both social science and literature that women across all cultures naturally gravitate toward men romantically and sexually. Instead, she argued this orientation is socially scripted and internalized through institutions like marriage, which function as mechanisms of socialization rather than expressions of genuine desire. The essay was specifically crafted to confront the erasure of lesbian identities within mainstream feminist writing. Rich did not intend to create division among women; rather, she issued a call to action, urging heterosexual feminists to recognize heterosexuality as an oppressive system and to work toward dismantling it. She positioned lesbian existence as a natural outgrowth of feminist thought, not a departure from it.

The Lesbian Existence and the Broader Erotic

Rich deliberately chose the phrase "lesbian existence" over "lesbianism," framing it not merely as a sexual label but as a way of living that consciously resists patriarchal structures. This terminology signals the past, present, and future presence of women who define themselves outside heterosexual norms. Paired with this is the "lesbian continuum," a concept that widens the scope of intimate female connection to encompass friendship, camaraderie, and emotional bonds beyond the romantic or sexual. Rich felt the word "lesbian" was too restrictive, confining intimacy to the erotic in a narrow sense. She drew on Audre Lorde's broader definition of the erotic, which strips it from purely sexual contexts and returns it to the root meaning of eros—love in its fullest expression. Lorde described the erotic as a woman's capacity for overwhelming joy when she taps into her deepest desires, channels creative energy, and connects authentically with others. This full experience of joy, Rich and Lorde suggested, threatens patriarchal order because it redirects women's fulfillment away from the prioritization of men's needs.

Structural Enforcement and the Machinery of Male Power

The theory of comphet identifies male dominance within patriarchal systems as a primary engine for enforcing female heterosexuality. Kathleen Gough outlined eight hallmarks of male power across archaic and modern societies: rejecting women's sexuality, imposing male sexuality on women, exploiting their labor, seizing control of their children, physically confining them, reducing them to objects in male transactions, denying their creative output, and blocking access to knowledge and cultural achievement. Together, these mechanisms produce what can be described as a "control of consciousness," convincing women that heterosexual relationships are inescapable, especially when compounded by the systematic erasure of lesbian history. The Radical Lesbians contended that heterosexual orientation can only persist where male domination prevails, and that women's self-realization depends on mutual upliftment rather than compliance. Victoria Brownworth added that the removal of lesbian sexuality from historical record mirrors the erasure of all autonomous female desire, which has long been filtered and defined through the male gaze.

Intersectional Dimensions and the Burden of Identity

Katerina Deliovsky expanded the framework by arguing that Western compulsory heterosexuality does not merely direct women's sexuality toward the opposite sex but also toward the same race, effectively creating a compulsory "white" heterosexuality. This manifests in media stereotypes that portray Black men as inherently aggressive or Asian men as feminine, reinforcing racial hierarchies within the heterosexual script. Deliovsky contended that when Rich described comphet as structurally securing men's rights and needs, the more precise reading is that it secures those of white men specifically. The historical maintenance of this system served not only male comfort but also the preservation of whiteness as a social and institutional norm, as evidenced by the long legal prohibition of interracial marriage. Deliovsky also noted that white women are not passive beneficiaries but active participants in sustaining a racist structure that advantages them. Meanwhile, Sandra Lipsitz Bem observed that because comphet operates from birth—assuming heterosexuality until proven otherwise—sexual minorities undergo a more intensive process of global identity development, constantly interrogating their experiences and selfhood in contrast to societal expectations.