Teaching about lesbians and gays in the psychology curriculum.

Heteronormativity and the Exclusion of Bisexuality in Psychology

“…It is clear from my analysis that the coverage of lesbian and gay sexualities in textbooks has improved since the studies of McDonald (1981) and King (1988 Sexual orientation is generally constructed as rooted in biology, unchangeable and dichotomous. Bisexuality is rarely mentioned and, when it is, it is only included sporadically and not theorized in any depth.…”

“…King (1988) reports that sexuality 'is viewed as a continuum along which an individual's identity and sexual activities may move at different stages of life' (p. 168) and Fox (2000) states that there is 'a greater acknowledgement of bisexuality as a valid sexual orientation and sexual identity' within psychology, following 'a critical reexamination of the dichotomous model of sexual orientation' (p. 161). However, Rust (2000a) reports that both popular understandings and scientific research on sexuality collapse bisexuality by dichotomous either/or inquiry.…”

“…The problem occurs when one group is considered the norm with others differing from it, thereby failing to 'measure up' to the ideal, superior, dominant standard' (p.151). As King (1988) writes 'questions of causality … are no more or less pertinent to the study of gays and lesbians than to the study of their heterosexual counterparts' (p.168). Although some textbooks pay lip service to this perspective, it is clearly not embedded in their subsequent presentation of research.…”

“…However, King (1988) gave a feel for the way lesbian and gay male sexualities were covered in US texts published in the 1980s, reporting that lesbian and gay psychology was still either not mentioned at all, or considered in chapters on abnormal psychology or psychopathology. Such chapters discussed the removal of homosexuality per se from the American Psychiatric…”