Redefining "Normal"
 |
| Image description: A famous scene from The Princess Bride in which Inigo Montoya utters the line "You keep using that word, I don't think it means what you think it means." To me, no word better exemplifies that idea than "normal," a word which people often use without considering its meaning. So today, I'd like to examine the concept of normal life and what it means - and what it shouldn't mean. |
Usually, this definition of supposed normal life means a few
things exclusively – either sex, romance, marriage, having children, or some
combination of these things. A lot of how this presents depends on factors like
age (example: for younger people, normal may not be tagged as romance per se,
but dating) or what a group of people considers more valuable (i.e. – some
people might place more emphasis on marriage than others). However, in my
experience, these attitudes that life must be “normal” do not specifically come
from only one faction of people or the other. In fact, part of what makes these
things so harmful are their ubiquitous nature. The demand that people live
“normal” lives comes from seemingly all sides and, although the definition of
normal may change, some common demands are there nonetheless.
There are several reasons why I can’t dismiss this behavior
as harmless internet nonsense to be ignored and shrugged off. As I said, these
are things I’ve seen and experienced in real life and so their impact goes
beyond just online circles. More than that, defining “normal life” as meaning
things like “sexual or romantic relationships,” “settling down,” and/or “having
children” implies that people who don’t have these things are abnormal. I’ve
discussed this before, and have highlighted instances in media where characters
who don’t seem to want these things are borderline harassed into having them by
other characters (and, by extension, the people writing them) or else are
shunned. This happens in real life too and it’s where the concept of amatonormativity
has its roots, as well as several kinds of aphobia.
But who defines what “normal” is? Why does this notion seem
to take hold of so many various kinds of people, regardless of how different
they are? What does it mean for people like me to live “normal lives?” Today,
I’d like to explore the common conflation of normal life and the concepts
mentioned above in this, my latest “Redefining” post, looking at how we can begin to
deconstruct and redefine this concept of supposed normalcy. Life is not going
to look the same for all people and that’s okay. While it’s probably not
possible to entirely escape the expectations of others, I think this topic is
important to not only spark thought, but to give people like me another way of
conceptualizing ourselves beyond the limiting definitions of a word that
probably doesn’t even mean what people think it means.
What Exactly Is
“Normal Life?”
When I say “normal life,” I’m referring to what a typical adult
life looks like through the lens of most popular belief and culture. Like I
said, this varies, but it tends to have similar characteristics. I’m not
referring to certain accepted societal rules and laws, many of which are common
sense and are generally considered good for society as a whole. Rather, what
I’m discussing today is an artificial construct, one that is largely
perpetuated and reproduced in media and by society because it’s how the most
visible people live their lives and thus has become “standard.” And just to be
clear, if that’s how you choose to define normal life, that’s perfectly okay –
but it’s only okay when you define normal life that way for yourself; expecting
other people to conform to this standard or else be considered abnormal and thus
worthy of disdain is where the problem lies.
Personally, I believe a lot of growth and beauty in life can
exist when we all accept that we’re abnormal to someone. No matter what the
subject, someone somewhere will think we’re weird. Chances are, this shows up
in small ways like your favorite band or the sports team you support or how you
eat your food (pineapple on pizza comes to mind). Many times, they aren’t
especially important, and so people are able to accept that the differences
among us are what makes the world go ‘round. When it comes to bigger things,
that’s where the inherent problems lie. But even beyond huge differences the
likes of which can lead to arguments – like religion, politics, etc. – the
notion of how we choose to live our lives seems to become fodder for people,
especially in spheres where people can give their opinions on anything and
everything.
I think this becomes so much of an issue because there are
certain elements of life people have been taught to think of as universal (as I
said above, these are things that have become the accepted standard). Going
back to my mother’s question that I mentioned in the intro, the only thing I
can think of that ever even comes close to an answer is that people assume
nearly everyone in the world is united by the common ground of sex, romance,
marriage, and/or children. And in some ways, this is an understandable assumption
for them to have. These things are indeed fairly standard throughout history
and across the globe, and whenever people don’t have these things, they tend to
be exceptions to the rule, separated from “normal people” by some metric or another.
 |
| Image description: Father Mulcahy from M*A*S*H. When I mention "exceptions to the rule," priests like Father Mulcahy come to mind. If you've read my first headcanons post, I discuss that the Father could also be seen as having aspec vibes, and while I think they tend to be portrayed well with him, they're still portrayed as markedly "different" due to his role as a priest. |
Therefore, when people are confronted with the idea that not everyone wants these things, I think it’s somewhat frightening. More than that, it strikes them as bizarre because they’ve been socialized to accept these things are part of the normal course of a person’s life and it can be tough for them to fully understand any alternative, let alone accept it. Granted, as an aspec person myself for whom aspecness is normal, I’m only guessing at what it must be like for people trying to reconcile aspec tendencies with their own version of life. As such, I may be way off, or my assessment may be wildly unfair. I also don’t mean to generalize and imply that all allosexual people think this or think the same way as one another, because of course that isn’t true. Just like aspec people are different, have different experiences/stories, and thus have varied opinions and thoughts, so too do allosexual people.
Moreover, I am blessed with a plethora of allosexual people
in my life who are wonderfully accepting of my aspec nature. Therefore, I can
say firsthand that not everyone makes this assumption, nor do they always treat
people with disrespect when they buck the accepted definition of normal. But
when it comes to media and fandom, this type of implicit support often gets
buried underneath the harmful stereotypes made by others. And again, because
these stereotypes are considered the standard, these things often run wild because no
one thinks to question them. Those who try are often shut out by other people
who believe that normal life has to look a certain way and deviation from that
norm shouldn’t be respected or taken seriously.
Part of what makes these situations so bad is their
unwinnable nature. Because “normal” is so ingrained, it feels like aspec people
are always left being the ones made to feel abnormal with no recourse. By
extension, we’re never allowed to think of other people as abnormal, only
ourselves. I’m not saying we should be doing that, especially since
judging people for prioritizing romantic and/or sexual relationships is just
flipping around a problematic trope in a way that’s still problematic. But what
I am saying is that it seems to me like aspec people are socialized by media
and society to accept that we’re the “weird” ones, rather than be allowed to
fully accept our point of view and conceptualize the world through that lens. In
my own life, I can say this has killed my confidence many times.
For aspec people who have sex/romance or are comfortable
with these things, they might have an easier time of fitting within this
framework, but I doubt they always can. Since definitions of normal life seem
to change depending on who you’re talking to, even living a “normal” life but
not experiencing sexual attraction can be in and of itself “abnormal.” And in my
own life as a sex-repulsed aromantic asexual, I’m left not only feeling like an
outlier, but like I’m constantly in the wrong while everyone else must be
right. In general, allosexual people’s opinions are not necessarily or automatically
superior just because they’re allosexual, and yet I think a lot of media,
fandom, societal expectations, etc. assume they are. This attitude continues to
perpetuate the rigidness of a supposed normal life, allowing the cycle to
continue.
How “Normal” is
Reinforced
If you’re a regular reader, you can likely predict my
examples of how “normal” is reinforced in media. Seven of Nine from Star
Trek: Voyager, for instance, embodies this notion extremely well. During
her time on Voyager, Seven’s transition from a former Borg drone to that
of a full-fledged member of the crew is marked by many milestones and
developments, but few are treated as important as the seemingly non-optional
development of romantic and/or sexual relationships. Cole in the video game Dragon
Age: Inquisition goes through something similar if the player chooses to
make the spirit boy more human, something which sees him get a girlfriend
because, as Cole himself puts it, “I am human now.” Then there’s The Big Bang Theory’s Sheldon Cooper, who at one point describes his aversion
to human contact as something to overcome, the implication being that he’ll
eventually be able to have more “normal” relationships if he does.
Of course, these characters finding romance or even having
sex is not automatically a bad thing, nor does it automatically negate an
asexual identity; there are plenty of aspec people who have sex for the sake of
their partners or for any number of valid reasons. Some of these characters
could even be demisexual, demiromantic, or anything else across the broad
asexual and aromantic spectrums. However, as I’ve discussed many times, these
things are usually not portrayed as part of these characters’ own journeys to
discover themselves or their sexualities. Rather, these things are almost
always played as other people (often explicitly allosexual/alloromantic people)
herding these characters towards a desired outcome, and this desired outcome is
usually played as one that is more comfortable or accepted or, yes, normal.
These examples don’t only encapsulate sex and/or romance,
however; some of them also cover the other accepted metrics for “normal” I’ve
mentioned thus far, such as marriage and having children. Let’s look again at
Sheldon Cooper, who eventually gets married to his girlfriend Amy during the
series and who is revealed through narration in the show Young Sheldon
to have also had children with her. Just like with sex or romance, aspec people
getting married or having children isn’t the problem; in fact, it’s something
that many aspec people experience during their lifetimes. The problem with
these things is the context in which they’re portrayed in media. In Sheldon’s
case, while it’s possible he’s a demisexual/demiromantic character, it’s
difficult to take these things as good representation when the show routinely
features his friends “othering” him for not having sex, romance, or any other
“normal” metric up to this point in time.
 |
| Image description: From left to right, Amy, Penny, and Bernedette from The Big Bang Theory. I usually talk about Sheldon when I discuss this show, but all three of these characters are also hurt by the supposed necessary standards of normal. In Amy's case, she started off as non-sexual and non-romantic like Sheldon and was eventually changed to be in constant pursuit of a sexual relationship from him. Meanwhile, both Penny and Bernadette are likewise altered in ways I'll discuss below. |
The show seems to say that normal is something that can be and should be enforced by other people, which is an uncomfortable thought from an aspec perspective. For Sheldon’s friends, sex and romance are normal, and since that’s how they live their lives, the assumption is that he should too. Even Amy herself routinely does her best to herd Sheldon in these directions because she’s ready for and desires intimacy before he does. Naturally, because the show is supposed to be a comedy, this is almost always played for laughs, despite the problematic nature of these many incidents. Usually Amy is determined to harass, trick, bribe, or guilt Sheldon into intimacy with her rather than honor his wishes, something that’s made even worse by the fact that Sheldon’s non-sexual and non-romantic nature was clear to her from the beginning. Therefore, rather than respect this element of his personality, she’s determined to change him – meaning the writers of the show are determined to change him.
Sheldon is not the only character who falls into this trap,
however, as I discuss in my “Redefining Happily Ever After” post (which shares
some notable overlap with this concept). In that post, I also draw attention to
the fact that neither Penny nor Bernadette want children and yet end up as
mothers or mothers-to-be by the end of the show. In the case of these two
allosexual characters, it’s very possible for either of them to change their
mind and decide they want to have children, of course; but when it’s played up
as a big deal that they don’t want them and then suddenly they do, the result
is far from natural character development. While I don't expect great character development in a show like this, I think it nevertheless demonstrates the
limitations of how society defines what a complete, adult, normal life should
be.
Naturally, this is not limited just to fictional characters
because stories do not exist in vacuums. After all, media is written by people
who have decided to write stories and
conceptualize characters this way, and that presents the biggest problem. I believe part
of what makes this issue so complicated is that it already exists in the
societal atmosphere, so it gets reproduced in media, which reinforces and
strengthens the preexisting attitudes on the subject, which in turn allows more
media to exist within that framework, and so on. Whenever anything dares to
break the cycle, it feels as if society makes sure to either stamp it out or
demand it link up with this seemingly infinite loop. This presents a bigger
problem in day-to-day life than most people would likely imagine.
The Danger of
“Normal”
As I’ve stated many times already (but which bears
repeating), the biggest problem with this standard of normal is
the implication that anyone who doesn’t attain these things is abnormal, which
means they can be treated accordingly. If enough people convince themselves
that aspec tendencies – and thus aspec people – are bizarre anomalies, it means
the wishes and decisions of aspec people, and especially the way they live
their lives, don’t have to be respected or honored. This has a myriad of
implications, both in real life and in fandom circles, and these implications
don’t just affect people on the asexual and/or aromantic spectrums either. I’ve
done two previous posts about how aphobia also impacts
non-aspec people, and often times when I talk about amatonormativity – the
societal pressure to make romance a focal point of one’s life, even when it’s
not appropriate – I discuss how this affects allosexual people just as much as
aspec ones.
In short, the idea of a forced, compulsory definition of
normal poses a hazard to people of all kinds. When it comes to
amatonormativity, I believe there is a tendency to portray people who choose
not to prioritize romantic relationships as unlikable and bizarre. While this
affects aspec people a great deal – especially those on the aromantic spectrum
– and is often implemented by portraying them as “frigid,” allosexual and
alloromantic people of all kinds can be treated this same way too. Thus, this
erroneous definition of normal and the ways society seeks to “punish” people
who don’t attain them should be distressing for all people, regardless of how
they identify. In both cases, this level of societal punishment usually
includes your opinions and values being ignored or degraded, and, if you have a
fandom life, can extend to being pushed out of your own fandoms.
As an aspec fan, I can attest to this firsthand. In fact,
one of the reasons why I began writing this post was to collect my thoughts
regarding this phenomenon in the BTS fandom. BTS is an enormously successful Korean
group who have been together for over a decade; while they began as teenagers
and young men in their early twenties, they are now all thirty or close to
it (just like me). Because they have reached an age that most of society has dubbed as
suitable for “settling down,” it’s not uncommon to see people say they hope BTS
can eventually go on to live “normal lives,” and to specifically mention
marriage and children in regard to that. Of course, this attitude bothers me
due to all the reasons I’ve discussed here, but it also baffles me; not only
have the members not seemed eager to do any of those things, but there are also
plenty of male Korean celebrities who, for whatever reason, either choose not
to get married or have children until they’re older (sometimes even into their
forties) or who seem in no great rush to have these things at all. And yet
these attitudes persist.
 |
| Image description: From left to right, V, Suga, Jin, Jung Kook, RM, Jimin, and J-Hope of BTS, here promoting their 2019 album Map of the Soul: Persona. BTS may have a song called "Boy With Luv" on this album, but many fans seem very troubled that they're boys without love as we know them. |
Unfortunately, this can’t just be chalked up to people
being misinformed or making harmless assumptions. This is clearly a standard attitude
and belief system for them, and their belief that only this
The entire thing further enforces fandom peer pressure,
which in turn also reinforces societal pressure too. In a previous post, I
talked about how this pressuring attitude is the natural enemy of good consent
because it goads people into relationships, often before they’re ready. In my
BTS example, it’s impossible for these internet strangers to literally pressure
any of the members because they don’t know them personally and don’t have
access to them or their thought processes. But I believe that if these people
are willing to put these suppositions on the internet about their favorite
band, they’re likely to hold these attitudes in their day-to-day life as well, and thus are likely to wield them against people whom they can impact. Believing
that these things alone lead to happiness is unfortunately a foolproof way to
ignore and invalidate the wants, needs, and emotions of another person.
This is why the idea of conforming to these artificial
metrics of normal is so insidious. When society, media, and most people convince
you that normalcy looks a certain way and leave no room for interpretation,
they are funneling you through a specific channel and towards a specific
outcome. If you have no tools or resources to lead you in another direction,
you are funneled against your will to this conclusion without recourse, and you’ll
likely conform to a standard that is not only artificial, but has the potential
to be ill-fitting and even dangerous. Although that may sound a little
dramatic, I don’t think it is. After all, living a life that does not suit you
is not only a bad thing for an individual, but for those around them, and can
lead to everything from depression and anxiety to anger and lashing out. In
short, the dangers of forcing people into a definition of normal can pose
literal danger.
Whether that danger is small or large, the idea of holding
everyone up to this standard is troubling to say the least. There are many
people – aspec and allosexual alike – for whom normalcy and happiness looks
very different from the established definition. That doesn’t mean you have to
like it, but it also doesn’t mean you have a right to force them to conform to
your own definition; after all, they may not like yours either. As long as
someone’s lifestyle is not harmful, they deserve to be left to find their own
desired path to happiness. I can’t imagine anyone who found true happiness or
inner peace did so through being forced to conform to an artificial standard,
and so I fail to see how this type of forced homogeny is ever a good idea in
the long term.
------------------------
If I had a dollar for every time someone used “normal” life
to refer to the things I’ve discussed here, I could buy my own private island where
my normal life would be watching the sunset as I drank nectar out of coconuts. As
such, I feel this topic needs to be discussed and analyzed as candidly as
possible. More than that, I think it needs to be discussed because I suspect
many people who fall into these traps don’t even realize they’ve done so. As
I’ve said in previous posts, if you ever find yourself unthinkingly quantifying
“normal” life in this way, it’s probably not your fault. Because society,
aphobia, amatonormativity, and other things have all worked together to create
this default narrative, it’s honestly not surprising that so many people adopt
it, even in situations where it doesn’t fit.
There is no problem with defining normal life as including
romance, sex, marriage, having children, etc. as your own definition of normal.
However, there is a huge problem with forcing this definition of normal onto
people who actively don’t want it. I think one of the best things that can be
done to combat this problem is to ask why it feels necessary to push this
standard onto people because, in so doing, we can challenge these preconceived
notions. I’ve heard people make the excuse that people who
don’t want children or don’t like children simply have to be socialized differently,
and I’m sure most aspec people have heard pushback in the vein of “how do you
know if you don’t try?”. But people who don’t live their lives in these
specific ways do not need to be taught, resocialized, or fixed, and I think
it’s important to examine why people feel like they do.
As I said earlier, these things feel ubiquitous in life, but
they don’t have to be for everyone. There are many valid ways to live one’s
life and many standards of “normal,” rather than just one supposed template. I
heartily encourage everyone to think for a moment about what their life looks
like and how someone else might consider it abnormal, and to imagine what it would feel like to be pressured into living in some other manner. It
sounds trite, but I think it really does come back to “treat others as you
would want to be treated.” Being pressured into living a certain way to uphold
an arbitrary metric defined by someone else is as limiting as it is unfair.
However, by becoming more mindful, I sincerely hope that we can transform this pressure into something rare and without much influence. If we’re
able to resist it when people try to force their opinions on us regarding other
topics, I hope we can someday live in a world where upholding a forced standard
of “normal” is just as inconceivable.
Comments
Post a Comment