Normal Sex and the Family
For a long time, sexuality has been carefully controlled to uphold heteronormativity and reinforce the idea of the ideal nuclear family. Expectations around gender roles, marriage, and reproduction weren’t just social customs, they were shaped and enforced by scientific, religious, and legal institutions. These institutions worked together to define what was considered “acceptable” sexuality while branding anything outside of that as deviant (McWhorter, 2009). Non-heterosexual relationships and non-reproductive sexual practices weren’t just seen as immoral; they were painted as threats to racial purity and social stability (McWhorter, 2009).
McWhorter (2009) explains how gay and lesbian people were historically portrayed as sexual predators, fueling fear-based narratives that led to social exclusion, legal persecution, and even medical intervention (p. 277). The fields of eugenics and sexology played a significant role in this, blending scientific racism with moral panic to classify homosexuality as a disorder that needed to be corrected (McWhorter, 2009, p. 269). Marriage between a man and a woman was promoted as the only "proper" relationship, reinforcing the idea that sexuality should exist only for reproduction. Meanwhile, relationships that didn’t fit this mold (queer, interracial, or non-reproductive) were cast as deviations that needed to be controlled (McWhorter, 2009, p. 273).
The fear of “sexual pollution” also influenced significant policies and social expectations. The push for social hygiene and eugenic programs wasn’t just about enforcing morality; it was about eliminating so-called “undesirable” traits by regulating sexuality, controlling who could marry, and restricting reproductive rights (Lawrence, 2014).
Threats to the Normal Family
The goal of the family to pass on superior genetic material through normalized sex encountered threats. Some of these threats were external, such as sexual predators, sexual psychopaths, and the State, but none were as serious as the internal threat of gender deviance (McWhorter, 2009). This threat was a failure on the part of parents who were responsible for maintaining the “ongoing evolutionary process” (McWhorter, 2009, p. 262). McWhorter (2009) argues the threat took two “monstrous forms: The Feminist or The Homosexual” (p. 264) and even worse, a combination of the two, “The Lesbian” (p. 262). Feminists and Homosexuals were seen as a type of race traitor, actively refusing to participate in the betterment and continuation of the normal family, and thus their eugenic contribution (McWhorter, 2009).
The Lesbian, subjected to physical pelvic exams in the name of eugenics, was discovered to have the undesirable trait of a narrow pelvis (McWhorter, 2009). This narrower pelvis was an inferior trait as a narrow pelvis cannot accommodate a larger superior white male infant head (McWhorter, 2009). This narrow pelvis was not only seen in sexual deviants but in women of colour and all races of inferior evolutionary development (McWhorter, 2009). This deviance allowed physicians to require pelvic exams in over 17 states prior to issuing marriage licenses to prevent inferior women or sexual deviants from marrying (McWhorter, 2009). All in the name of eugenics, furthering the superior genetics of Nordics, preserving the Family.
Contemporary Applications
&
Impact in Modern Society
By the 1980s, the idea of childhood ‘sissy boys’, boys who were effeminate (but included girls who were masculine), had become medicalized as “gender identity disorder” (McWhorter, 2009, p. 271). These youth required treatments programs, not to make them comfortable with themselves, but to reinforce conformity to gender norms and normalized heterosexuality (McWhorter, 2009). These conversion treatment therapies were amended into the Criminal Code of Canada in 2021 as a criminal offence (Parliament of Canada, 2021). However, despite this criminalization, there are conversion coaches available to Canadians through online avenues, some of which have no degree or credentials to be doing such work (Sampson, Cowley, Szeto, & Tomlinson, 2022).
To this day, those outside of what is deemed normal gender identity and sexuality are labelled abnormal, and as McWhorter (2009) asserts “what we believe—a large majority of us, at least—is that abnormality does equal inferiority” (p. 292). This social perception of inferiority requires an ongoing fight for protection for those who are ‘gender-nonconforming’ and those outside of heterosexual relationships. This need is highlighted in 2025, as President Trump continues with biopolitical attacks in the United States through officially declaring only two legal sexes and cutting funding to Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity (DEI) programs and initiatives (Wendling & Epstein, 2025). These changes exemplify how the biopolitics of normalization have not disappeared but have shifted in appearance. No longer outright driven by eugenics’ scientific claims of superior genetic material, but driven by control, power, and the need to divide the citizenry making them easier to command.
Unpacking
Deviance
The article "Deconstructing 'Sexual Deviance': Identifying and Addressing Assumptions" explores how ideas about sexual deviance are shaped by diagnostic manuals. It connects to course discussions on how non-normative sexual behaviours have been medicalized, often reinforcing rigid definitions of what is considered "normal."
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00224499.2022.2109568?
Redefining
Deviance
The article "Integrating Theories of Gender and Sexuality with Deviance" highlights why it's important to consider gender and sexuality in discussions about deviance. It connects to course themes by showing that what society sees as "deviant" (especially when it comes to family and relationships) is not just about individual choices, but is shaped by larger social systems and power structures.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/08912432211009859
Summary
-
Sexuality has long been controlled by institutions like science, religion, and law to reinforce heteronormativity and uphold the nuclear family. Anything outside of this norm was labelled deviant and a threat to society.
-
Feminists and 2SLGBTQIA+ individuals were seen as dangers to the 'normal family' and eugenic ideals. Lesbian women were even subjected to invasive medical exams to determine their reproductive 'fitness'.
-
Homosexuality and gender nonconformity were historically treated as disorders requiring correction
-
Discrimination against gender-diverse and 2SLGBTQIA+ individuals continues today, with governments using policy changes (like limiting gender recognition and cutting DEI funding) to enforce social norms and divide populations.
Designed and written by Amanda Gear and Meagan Baranyk
References
Lawrence, Maggie. (2014). Reproductive Rights and State Institutions: The Forced Sterilization of Minority Women in the United States [Documents]. Trinity Student Scholarship. Trinity College Digital Repository. https://jstor.org/stable/community.34030944
McWhorter, L (2009). Racism and Sexual Oppression in Anglo-America: A Genealogy. Indiana University Press
Parliament of Canada. (2021). Government Bill (House of Commons) C-4 (44-1) - royal assent - an act to amend the Criminal Code (Conversion Therapy) - parliament of Canada. Government Bill (House of Commons) C-4 (44-1) - Royal Assent - An Act to amend the Criminal Code (conversion therapy) - Parliament of Canada. https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/44-1/bill/C-4/royal-assent
Sampson, A., Cowley, J., Szeto, E., & Tomlinson, A. (2022, March 28). Conversion therapy is illegal in Canada. but some U.S. life coaches are offering it to Canadians online | CBC News. CBCnews. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/marketplace-life-coach-conversion-therapy-1.6369104
Wendling, M., & Epstein, K. (2025, January 20). Trump makes “two sexes” official and scraps dei policies. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/czx84en1yp4o