Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence

Adrienne Rich (1929-2012) was an especially active, prolific poet whom many readers and critics regard as the best of her generation (Mays 987). In her essay Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence Rich directs the reader to consider the degree to which heterosexual “preference” has been imposed on women (Rich 652). Rich explains her perception of “the enforcement of heterosexuality for women as a means of assuring male right of physical, economical, and emotional access” to them, thus rendering invisible the lesbian possibility (R 647). From the beginning of the essay, contradicting opinions are presented like a ping pong ball back and forth until the rhythm of the author’s identity is revealed. “You can learn from watching poets at work, seeing how they change their mind or test alternative points of view, how they find their distinctive voices and come to terms with their identities. In fact, Rich suggested that her artistic growth was, in part, a matter of closing the gap between the woman in the poem and the woman writing the poem” (M 987-988). “Like the contextual differences between readers and texts, the differences among people (in terms of class, race, gender, ethnicity, sexual preference, able-bodiedness, age, weight, etc.) are not absolute either” (Nealon 175). Why should it be found necessary to enforce women’s total emotional, erotic loyalty and subservience to men? Has the lesbian existence become more visible in recent years, and consequently more women are rejecting the heterosexual “choice” (R 636)? 

Rich suggests that heterosexuality, like motherhood, needs to be recognized and studied as a political institution – even, or especially by those individuals who feel they are, in their personal experience, the precursors of a new social relation between the sexes (R 637). It is the biological roles that make sexual difference an essential difference that exist between men and women. That biology is then used as a warrant for the strict determination and limitation of social roles (N 182). Females give birth, thus women alone are assigned the responsibility for childcare. This is believed to have “led to an entire social organization of gender inequality, and that men as well as women must become primary carers for children if that inequality is to change” (R 635). The idea that women are best at childrearing is a constructed difference. Women are influenced by culture from the time they are young to silence their voices, refrain from participating in aggressive sports, to eat small portions, and adopt a posture of social and sexual submission. Heterosexuality has been analyzed as a patriarchal institution which perpetuates gendered power relations through sexuality (Carroll 2). The means of assuring the male access to women is extensively researched by Kathleen Barry. 

Barry documents extensive and appalling evidence for the existence of, on an exceptionally large scale, international female slavery which involves women of every race and class. Where in, this forced emotional erotic loyalty to men, the victim of sexual assault is held responsible for her own victimization; as leading to the rationalization and acceptance of other forms of enslavement, where the women are presumed to have “chosen” their fate. Sexual abuse and terrorism of women by men has been rendered almost invisible by treating it as natural and inevitable. “Until we name the practice, give conceptual definition and form to it, illustrate its life over time and space, those who are its most obvious victims will also not be able to name it or define their experience” (Rich and Barry 644). By courageously examining heterosexuality women can shatter the silence and find a new clarity in personal relationships (R 648). 

The categories of gender and class as an index of social division works against women and same sex couples. “So why does class continue to lead such an underground existence? Part of the answer seems to be the fact of other, equally pervasive and strongly held ideologies: that U.S. society is fundamentally “egalitarian”, “meritocratic”, and “fair”. Under the assumption of equal opportunity, for example, many people feel it is up to the individual to make it or break it in the “new economy” (N 195). Central and intrinsic to the economic realities of women’s lives is the requirement that women will “market sexual attractiveness to men, who tend to hold the economic power and position to enforce their predilections. Two forces of American society converge: men’s control over women’s sexuality and capitol’s control over employees’ work lives” (Rich and MacKinnon 641-642). “A lesbian, closeted on her job because of heterosexist prejudice, is not simply forced into denying the truth of her outside relationships or private life; her job depends on her pretending to be not merely heterosexual but a heterosexual woman, in terms of dressing and playing the feminine, deferential role required of “real” women. The fact is that the workplace, among other social institutions, is a place where women have learned to accept male violation of [their] psychic and physical boundaries as the price of survival” (R 642). Legislation and popular culture have the power to shift influence, and address creatively the inequalities suffered by people due to differences of race, gender, ethnicity, class, or sexual preference.  

An online, anonymous survey of LGBT Americans was done on April 11 – 29, 2013. Research indicates that more honest answers are received anonymously, on sensitive topics. When asked if being lesbian is a negative factor in their life only 8% say it is, compared to 38% who say being lesbian is a positive experience, and 54% say it makes no difference (Pew Research Center LGBT/32). Surveys of the public show acceptance of lesbian couples is on the rise. “Lesbian existence comprises both of breaking the taboo and the rejection of a compulsory way of life” (R 649). Heterosexuality has been forcibly and subliminally imposed on women, yet everywhere women have resisted it. The acceptance of women who prefer emotional-physical relationships with other women is on the rise socially and politically at this space and time. “In the late fifties I was able to write, for the first time, directly about experiencing myself as a woman. I had been taught that poetry should be ‘universal,’ which meant, of course, nonfemale. Until then I had tried very much not to identify myself as a female poet” (Mays and Rich 1002). “Charlotte Bronte, who understood that while women may, indeed must, be one another’s allies, mentors, and comforters in the female struggle for survival, there is quite extraneous delight in each other’s company and attraction to each other’s minds and character, which proceeds from a recognition of each other’s strengths” (R 659).