define:hetrosexual
Friday, June 15th, 2007 at 1:14 PM
Yesterday I had one of those moments that you can only really experience in a place like Nairobi. A single question that could fill an entire term’s worth of philosophy, religious education, political science lectures.
I was sitting in a cyber café when the lady on the computer next to me, a complete stranger, turned to face me and pointing to her screen asked, “Excuse me, what does this word mean?” One of her friends had forwarded her a joke which had the word “heterosexual” in it; this was the word she wanted me to explain to her.
Easy peasy right?
Not quite, just try it now, how would you explain, in a couple of sentences what heterosexual means?
I fell into the trap of immediately going down the sexual route as I blurted out, “People who have sex with people of the opposite sex”.
“Ah you mean prostitutes?” she replied.
Ok clearly I wasn’t getting my point across. So I embarked on the opposites approach, employing the Law of Contradiction (or Noncontradiction if you prefer). I asked her if she knew what homosexual was. She wasn’t sure. Damn.
So now I am digging deeper, because she wants to know what homosexual is and I am not going to fall into the trap of defining everything by sexual intercourse again.
Forget sexual intercourse I had bigger problems as I now I found myself using words like “normal” as in, heterosexual are normal. Now do I really want to go there? Heterosexual as the definiendum and normal as the definiens for that definiendum? Or ‘normal’ as the prima inter pares in a series of definiens on heterosexuality? That implies, by extension, homosexuals are not normal. Isn’t that an abuse of the Law of Identity? Besides I feel that is not for me to decide for her, whatever my beliefs on homosexuality and heterosexuality are. One of my brothers told me, “The fact that you hesitated and resisted to using the word “normal” when describing heterosexual highlights that you have been living outside.” (Outside = outside the country and indeed the continent). Now that sparked of a whole new debate, but I digress. This lady and her question was threatening to take over my thought process for the rest of the month!
So try it now, explain heterosexuality without using the word ‘normal’ or referring to sexual intercourse.
Now you see what I mean about filling a term’s worth of lectures of philosophy, religious education, political science etc.
Later in the day as I shared this story with a friend she gave me her solution, I should have just told that lady to Google it. Now why didn’t I think of that!
Email This Post
Entry Filed under: Africa, Kenya, Mental, Politics
17 Comments Add your own
1. Keguro | June 15th, 2007 at 3:56 pm
For some reason, this reminds me of the “crazy” woman at the bus stop (where all the crazies seem to hang out) who didn’t understand the word “urine” and kept asking me what “u-rine” is.
At least that was easy. Kind of.
2. Kenyan Gay | June 15th, 2007 at 4:50 pm
Interesting post. I will hold back on my definition once I see other comments.
It is quite easy if one thinks about it
3. 3N | June 15th, 2007 at 5:07 pm
I think I would have explained it from the point of view of what ’society defines as heterosexual’. Because if you use ‘normal’ then you have to somehow explain why any other sexual orientation is not normal.
part of the wiki definition doesn’t make sense to me:
Sexual behavior with a member of the opposite sex or gender regardless of sexual orientation or self-identification
4. JKE | June 15th, 2007 at 7:32 pm
ROFL!! pole bro, I know how these things can keep one busy. Argh.
While I like Medusa’s rational advice, I will try to give my 2c explanation:
“Heterosexuality is when you are wearing red pumps with blue jeans, and then there’s something called homosexuality, which is like wearing blue pumps with blue jeans”.
5. JKE | June 15th, 2007 at 7:33 pm
(ladies, pls advice, does this make sense?)
6. Serina | June 15th, 2007 at 8:13 pm
All definitions apply to males and females within the same specie group…
Hetrosexuality: male attracted (have a strong liking/preference) to females only or female attracted to males only.
Homosexuality: male attracted to males only or a female attracted to females only .
Bisexuality: male attracted to both males and females or female attracted tp both males and females.
How did I do?
7. Mitzy | June 16th, 2007 at 3:25 pm
This must have been a brick sweating moment for you Mental! I would have gone with Serina’s definition.
3N, I think the wiki definition means that people that consider/refer to themselves as homosexual, could still display heterosexual behavior at one point or another?
8. alexcia | June 17th, 2007 at 10:16 am
Mental,
You were on the right track until the “Ah you mean prostitutes?” threw you off. You were *required* to answer in the affirmative… as opposed to the nuanced but unnecessary detour to homosexual!!
Yes prostitutes are in general heterosexuals.
I think that is the meaning, “she” wanted to hear and prolly the only one she was willing to accept.
You cannot expect her to eat the whole goat in one bite
9. Osas | June 17th, 2007 at 3:00 pm
Am relieved to see you avoided the easiest trap:
to equate heterosexual with “straight” and hosexual with “queer”. Thanks.
10. Mentalacrobatics | June 18th, 2007 at 9:58 am
Keguro I haven’t seen you around these parts since I revealed my appreciation for Babyface
Have my past sins been absolved?
KG - That’s the thing. I didn’t have time to think, I had to wing it!
3N - now when we start talking about society, which one should we talk about. The national, the continental, the global?
JKE - hehe! What is there something wrong with me wearing my orange lesso and green rugby socks when I’m going down to the kiosk for airtime?
Serina - how about all those men who are supposedly living on the DL. They have wives and family but are gay. Where would you place them, not that they need to be placed anywhere!
Mitzy - next time I’ll call you so you can talk to her!
Alexcia - oh oh now you’re bring animals into this!
11. Serina | June 18th, 2007 at 10:58 am
I’d actually call them Bi-s..i mean..getting it to perform its duty on a woman means they are no 98%Gay ama?
12. Serina | June 18th, 2007 at 11:00 am
On another note, if society wasn’t so fixed on trivialities..it doesn’t really matter…we are all human…on the down low or not.
13. Lola | June 18th, 2007 at 12:53 pm
That is very very funny…
But, I’m quite shocked that there are adults who don’t know what heterosexual (or homosexual) means!
14. Lola | June 21st, 2007 at 10:57 am
Funnily enough a couple of days ago someone I know asked me what heterosexual meant!! I just had one word for them: GOOGLE! hehehe.
15. Kenyan Gay | June 25th, 2007 at 1:32 pm
Interesting people.. here is the thing I wanted to see, if it is possible for someone to explain heterosexual without using homosexual in the explanation.
The second observation was explanations of the same word without sex coming in.
Both of the above have been achieved in this case. Why then do people have to bring up sex when they describe homosexuality?
Sorry to use your post to alter the topic slightly
16. mentalacrobatics | June 26th, 2007 at 9:47 am
KG, people bring up sex whenever they discuss a relationship of any kind! How would you describe homosexuality?
17. JKE | June 27th, 2007 at 4:17 pm
“Why then do people have to bring up sex when they describe homosexuality?”
Because of homoSEXuality and heteroSEXuality? Guess we all know it isn’t about the sexual part alone. But it sure is a tricky question.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed