Suchergebnisse

'Hetero' (from the Greek, 'different') is most familiar to us in its attachment as a prefix to 'sexuality'. In gender studies, sexuality studies and feminist scholarship, heterosexuality is routinely contrasted with homosexuality, and this contrast is often mapped over the opposition of heteronormative versus queer (ideas, practices, effects). These word-pairs (heterosexual and homosexual; heteronormative and queer) tend to operate dichotomously – that is, in exclusive, exhaustive and hierarchically ordered ways. Taking up Sara Ahmed's work on orientation, this article experiments with an alternative pairing, exploring the potential for admixture or subversion in those dichotomies. 'Heterodoxy' is introduced as a concept that might be usefully contrasted with 'orthodoxy' in sexuality/gender studies – particularly in relation to current debates on marriage. The larger aim of this endeavour is to theorise heterosexuality in more accurate ways, and to seek out understandings of heterosexuality (including its historical relationship with heteronormative marriage) which acknowledge its horrors without foreclosing hope for its future.

This article considers whether mainstream Hollywood "bromance" movies offer potential for sex/gender transgression and/or progressive representations of masculinity. Bromances resemble the heavily feminized genre of romantic comedy (or "rom-coms") except that the action centers on male friendships rather than heterosexual romance. On the surface, at least, bromances promise opportunities for gender subversion and seem to offer richly heterodoxical possibilities. Using The Hangover (2009), Wedding Crashers (2005), and I Love You, Man (2009) as examples of mainstream bromance, this article argues that while it is possible to observe crevices in the representation of monolithically heteronormative masculinity in each of these films, their subversive potential is decidedly limited. These limitations suggest that while considering heterodox masculinities in bromantic movies may be productive, heterodoxies are complex and, perhaps, even contradictory. While the concept of heterodoxy seems to have potentially exciting applications in masculinity studies, this articles argues for care and caution in its adoption.

This article argues that although marriage has been a historically productive and important site of feminist inquiry, feminist theorizations of the institution of marriage have reached something of a stalemate. Moreover, contemporary debates on the merits of same-sex marriage risk disarming feminist marriage critiques while simultaneously replicating their limitations. This does not mean, however, that marriage should be evacuated as an arena of feminist concern; rather, new ways of thinking about politics, subjectivities, sexualities and gender should be brought to bear against our understandings of what contemporary marriage is and does.

This book explores heterosexualities in their complex and everyday expressions. It engages with theories about the intersection of sexuality with other markers of difference, and gender in particular. The outcome will productively upset equations of heterosexuality with heteronormativity and accounts that cast heterosexuality in "sex critical, sex as danger" terms. Queer/feminist 'pro-sex' perspectives have become prevalent in analyses of sexuality, but in these approaches queer becomes the site of subversive, transgressive, exciting and pleasurable sex, while heterosex, if mentioned at all, c.