Farvid (2016) calls for research to “examine the nature and function of heteronormativity.” She talked about how university textbooks depict heterosexuality as normal and natural. For example, King (1988) found that introductory psychology textbooks in the 1980s excluded gay or lesbian topics, or when it did cover it, it did so in the chapters on abnormal psychology or psychopathology, presenting them as pathologies: anything like this happening with textbooks now? Moreover, are LGBTQ+ lives included or excluded (in text or pictures) when discussing topics like sexuality, romance, love, relationships, marriage, childbirth, and couples therapy?
Later, Barker (2007) found that things after 2000 had improved, but there were excessive discussions of the origins of homosexuality (nothing on the origins of heterosexuality) and discussions on relationships were mostly heterosexual, emphasizing biological and dichotomous (gay vs straight) nature of sexual orientation, and discussions of gender were binary and stereotypical. I would add further evidence of heteronormativity: uncritical reviews of research that support natural and biological nature of sexual orientation.
Let’s look at introductory psychology textbooks and see if there is any evidence of heteronormativity and how it manifests.
Pick at least one of the attached textbooks published 2009-2015.
Search the index or use ctrl f to find discussions of sexuality, sexual orientation, heterosexuality, homosexuality, romance, love, marriage, sexual dysfunction, childbirth, and related topics. Find a section worth of critique that seems to be heteronormative (it privileges heterosexuality and problematizes everything else). Note that you can find either text or pictures that are troubling, or sometimes the exclusion of content is also worthy of criticism. You can also compare results across different textbooks to make your case.
Once you find a section that you think is good to use, propose your idea to the professor.
Find a peer-reviewed journal article that helps. Identify this to the professor.
Now, write it up.
Quote the section clearly,
and then critique it,
citing at least one source that helps you make your argument.
Conclude with suggestions to the author on how to repair the heteronormativity in their textbook.
