“Heteronormativity” is not a bad thing. It’s a natural thing: the human organism is organized toward heterosexuality. We are not hermaphroditic or asexual creatures. Our individual reproductive systems are incomplete: we require the reproductive system of someone of the opposite sex in order to actually reproduce. This is the natural order—whether you believe in atheistic evolution or creationism or panspermia or any other explanation for the origin of life.

We can explain the purpose of the organs of the circulatory system and of the digestive system, and we can just as easily explain the purpose of the organs of the reproductive system. We know why they are shaped the way they are and why they are located where they are. They are ordered toward sexual intercourse (and the subsequent childbearing) which is heterosexual in nature.

This is why “heteronormativity” exists—because heterosexuality is normal. And there is nothing wrong with saying this. It’s a basic observation about the human species. It’s not a “privilege” to be accounted for. It is the natural order of Homo sapiens, just as it is the natural order of our species to be bipedal and have bilateral symmetry.

Along with this, of course, is “cisnormativity.” Cis is a prefix that basically means normal: the person identifies as what they actually are as opposed to some amorphous construct based solely on emotional projection and conformity to sex-based stereotypes. Most people have a fairly realistic idea of what they are, and based on this understanding they are able to better know themselves and describe who they are. It isn’t a privilege or a special advantage to recognize that you cannot change what you are and that what you are plays an integral part in shaping who you are.

Children inherently recognize heterosexuality (and “cis”) as the norm because from a very young age they understand the basic reality of sexual reproduction despite their ignorance of the mechanics of it: everyone has a mother and a father, even if one or both of them are not personally known for reasons outside of the child’s control. This natural human family unit is created upon the moment of a child’s conception, and it exists regardless of the emotions of the individuals involved because the relationship is based on the physical biological reality of the child.

Children conceived through anonymous sperm or egg donation, or who are adopted, or who never know their biological father, experience pain from the lack of their relationship(s) to one or both biological parents, even if there is a good reason to not be in a relationship with them (i.e. abuse or neglect). Biological heritage is an important part of a person’s identity. It explains why we look the way we do, and it often plays a role in our personalities and talents.

To deny these people their pain—to deny that their existence is rooted in loss—is cruel. We have to recognize that adult selfishness hurts children in a myriad of ways and that the effects will continue to haunt children into adulthood.

Based on the observable natural order of the human organism, it is not unreasonable to believe that human behaviors should be in line with the natural order of our bodies. What we do should be ordered towards what is good for our bodies and good for those new people (babies) who may be made from the acts of our bodies.

“What is this body part for?” is something we can understand from a fairly early age, and if someone suggests that we do something with it that is not normal, then it should be no surprise to that person if his or her suggestion is met with discomfort, disgust, or even horror. “THAT DOES NOT GO THERE” is a perfectly reasonable response to some of the sexual behaviors being taught by school systems such as Fairfax County.

And if a student or teacher behaves in such a way so as to advertise that he likes to use his body parts in sexual ways that are not in line with their natural purpose, it is not unreasonable for other students to be grossed out by that. It is not unreasonable for them to see such behaviors as perverted. It is not unreasonable for students to avoid other students or teachers who they believe to be perverts because of those behaviors.

We cannot make people be accepting of behaviors that they instinctually understand to be disordered. The only thing you can do is try to brainwash them and desensitize them and punish them. Except no one has the right to teach students that things they understand to be unnatural and repulsive are instead good things that they have no right to criticize. In fact, I’d argue that people trying to do such things to students—brainwashing, desensitizing, and punishing—are wicked, selfish people who deserve nothing less than to be publicly ostracized.