I’m honoured to have been included in the amazing podcast The Parallel Effect, which invites us to imagine worlds in which history took different turns, meaning that pivotal decisions unfolded differently, reshaping the systems, values, and lives we know today. Each conversation was paired with an artist who created something aligned with the ideas on that episode of the podcast.
I was invited to imagine a world without heteronormativity for the podcast. You can also hear amazing interviews with people imagining worlds without injustice, ableism, single-use plastics, private transport, and many more to come. This is the trailer for the whole series:
You can listen to my episode on The Parallel Effect Substack on the following links, as well as reading a summary there, and watching a video about the wonderful creation artist Audax Mrozik Gawler made in response: A kit to help young humans find their nodes of belonging and steward world-making between species, the KINNECT.
Below are the notes I wrote in preparation for my interview with Daz Chandler on the show. Read on for a little more written detail if you’re interested…
Just before we take a deep dive into the world you visited, how it looks and how it functions, would you mind elaborating a little on the concept of “benign variation”? How does it relate to the idea of normativity?
Benign variation is a concept from Gayle Rubin’s classic paper, Thinking Sex. It’s the idea that – instead of there being good and bad sexual identities, desires and practices – humans naturally have a whole range of sexualities (including asexualities) which are all equally valid & valuable, so long as they’re only ever acted on ethically and consensually.
Dominant cultural normativities create hierarchies between supposed normal and less normal sexualities, as well as genders, relationship styles, appearances, bodyminds, and all kinds of other things. Actually, the ways our bodies work, combined with the world we’re born into, and what happens over the course of our lives combine to form a vast array of different ways of experiencing and understanding things, including sex.
Benign variation is aligned with approaches like open normativities or pluriverses. In such approaches we recognise that people and communities will all have their stories, understandings and ways of doing things. But these are never imposed on others, and other stories and ways of doing things are held as equally valid and valuable. We might connect this to the ways in which ecological diversity is essential for ecosystems.
Sahana Chattopadhyay writes that pluriversal approaches regard many diverse, interconnected worlds, or ways of being, as coexisting, rather than a single, unified reality. Pluriversal approaches emphasize the value of multiple perspectives and experiences.
Alexis Shotwell defines open normativities as collectively crafted ways of being that shape our experiences and understandings, and are oriented toward widespread flourishing.
In terms of parallel worlds and alternative timelines, we know that many of the worlds we’ve visited so far have been almost identical to this one, until something happens that sets it on a different course. In this parallel world you’ve just arrived back from, were there any historical or cultural events that inspired this shift away from heteronormativity, or has it always been that way?
The world we visited was very much like ours until the point where people recognised – much earlier than we have – the links between personal and social disconnection and ecological crisis. They realised that if we didn’t address disconnection we would lose everything
This disconnection included any sense that some people, experiences, or ways of being were inherently more normal, valid or valuable than others. People realised that there is benign variation at all levels of experience. They woke up to the violence involved in disconnecting into better/worse, normal/abnormal, good/bad, etc.
In order for people to really get this – and to want to do something different – it was necessary to make it both global and personal. People had to see that we’d all lose everything if we carried on this way and they had to realise that normativities hurt them personally.
This latter point involved understanding that normativities hurt both those who are excluded by them and those who are caught up in them. For example, normativities around sex hurt those who are sexually marginalised, they are a huge part of why so much non-consensual sex happens, and they are why people feel so unfulfilled sexually and have so much shame around sex. Normativities around gender hurt gender divergent people, and they hurt men and women who are trying to fit norms of masculinity and femininity. Normativities around how bodyminds should work exclude disabled and neurodivergent people, and they hurt those who conform to norms about how bodyminds should function, for example in education and in the workplace.
In the world I visited, people recognised that easing our suffering, others’ suffering, and the suffering of the planet were utterly interconnected.
What challenges has this world faced in implementing the benign variation model? Was there any significant resistance or unexpected consequences?
Two major challenges were around:
- Bringing new people up with this model, in families and education systems, and
- Enabling those who had been brought up with the old model to shift to the new model
It was particularly challenging for everyone to face and forgive the personal and collective harms that had been done to them in the old model, and the harm that they had done or been complicit in themselves.
Everyone was given a period of at least five years – over the course of a twenty-five year transition process – to really focus on making these shifts internally, with deep support from the people and systems around them, and flexibility to do this work in whatever way fitted best for them. Support included space to engage in solitary practices, mentorship from those who had already been through such periods, peer-support with others who were focusing on this work, and regular meetings in groups and communities engaged in similar practices.
Practically this period was enabled by things like: universal basic income, recognising all work as valid and not requiring unnecessary work, community living, and people downsizing to a much smaller sense of what counts as ‘enough’.
There’s so much to ask but I suppose my first question relates to your initial impression of the place. How did you know that you had travelled somewhere different? What immediate clues did this alternative realm provide?
I was immediately struck by the way that, in this world, people were encouraged to find the kinds of relationships, intimacies, life projects and so on that were nourishing to them and enabled them to flourish. They weren’t expected to fit others’ expectations, or cultural assumptions about how best to live, work and relate.
This meant that people were much more fulfilled, and more supportive of others being equally fulfilled. They weren’t trying to make themselves be a certain way in order to fit in, or to be what would be convenient or comfortable for somebody else. Nor were they putting pressure on others in that kind of way.
People seemed much less masked, more open and curious, and more okay with having periods of not knowing, of trying things out
I want to talk now about social structures and family dynamics…In a world without heteronormativity, how have family structures evolved? Are there new forms of kinship or caregiving arrangements?
All different relationship and family structures are seen as valid in this world. Care and domestic labour are valued as highly as other kinds of work, with everybody being given enough time to be with the close people in their lives. It’s expected that most children will have several adults involved in bringing them up, and all adults will be supported in how to parent well.
Also inner parenting and inner partnering is valued as highly as the outer kinds. Everyone is supported to get solitude for, and support around, their inner work. This means they learn how to be intimate and loving with themselves, honest and kind about their capacities and limitations, and able to ask for – and access – the support they need.
Everyone is seen as both needing of care and capable of offering care. They are supported to discover – and to communicate – what they need, and what they can offer. Again there’s a shared understanding that there’ll inevitably be benign variation in people’s needs and offerings.
How does this model affect parenting? What changes in how children are raised and educated about relationships and identity?
Children are raised that whatever shape their gender, sexuality, or self ends up taking is just fine, and it’s also fine when it shifts and changes over time. If physical or psychological support is needed for young people to feel comfortable and congruent in their bodyminds, that’s supported.
With heteronormativity gone, there’s a huge shift in how adults are with young people’s feelings. Instead of trying to programme boys not to be fearful, and girls not to be angry, for example, young people are encouraged to experience all their feelings. They are helped to learn how to be with themselves through tough feelings, instead of blaming out, shaming in, avoiding their feelings, or withdrawing from anything that risks bringing up pain.
Similarly all bodyminds and their capacities and limitations are valued, rather than some people being seen as better, more attractive, or more intelligent than others.
What replaces traditional markers of adulthood, like marriage, in a society not built on normative ideals?
There are both celebratory and grieving rituals around key transition points. These recognise that different transitions will be meaningful to different people, and at different points in their lives.
For example, key transitions might be major relationship formations, deepenings, changes or endings, with equal value placed on friend, family, erotic/romantic, colleague, and other kinds of relationships. Other key transitions might relate to major bodymind or life path decisions, struggles, openings or changes.
In contrast to our world where so many individuals struggle with normative ideas of desire and identity, it must be so liberating for folks – particularly children and teenagers – to be supported to grow into their authentic selves. How are young people guided in discovering and expressing their desires in a non-normative context?
This world is informed by Audre Lorde’s expansive concept of the erotic and a similarly expansive concept of intimacy.
This means that children and young people are encouraged to explore what ‘lights them up’ or ‘makes them feel most alive’ and to orient towards this in all areas of life. They don’t restrict desire to sex, or intimacy to romance. For example, this might include tuning into what gives them: a good feeling in their body, a sense of mental immersion/excitement, an experience of flow or being in the zone creatively, or a feeling of expansiveness, playfulness and curiosity, and/or safety, trust and comfort.
This has a huge impact on the world of work. All contributions that need to happen in this world do happen because there is benign variation in what people love doing, and because people are fully valued for what they contribute, including cleaning, serving, caring, and manual labour. It’s also totally okay to change direction in work through a lifetime, and just to try something for a while.
This also has a huge impact on the world of relationships. People go towards the relationship forms, and the people and other beings, that are a good fit with them and feel mutually nourishing. There is equal value placed on fleeting connections, long term ones, and everything in between. And there is a recognition of impermanence and loss in relationships without seeing this as a problem, or something to blame on others, or ourselves.
How does this world approach sex and relationship education? What does the curriculum emphasise to support the “benign variation” model?
A big shift is that relationship education is given at least as much time and energy as skills and knowledge education. It’s a cornerstone of the curriculum.
It is recognised that people need teaching and practices about how to relate well with themselves, others and the world. Also, embodied and emotional learning is valued at least as highly as intellectual learning and learning practical skills.
It is also recognised that people have different ways of learning and different callings. Curriculums give a lot of time to play, and to helping people find the ways of learning and the kinds of work/play that are the best fit for them (e.g. learning through visual, audio, sensing, relating, etc.)
With benign variation there is no grading whatsoever! There’s just lots of support for people to find what ways of contributing are the best fit for their capacities and enthusiasms.
How does this world define and enforce the principles of consent and ethics?
This world moves away from capitalist-colonialist ways of relating with ourselves, others and the world. This is a deep shift because it means people are endeavouring never to speak or act from a place of trying to get something from someone, or to make them feel or behave a particular way.
There’s a valuing of all kinds of relationships. For example, there’s no hierarchy of biological over chosen relationships, romantic over friendship, or human over non human.
Non-consensual and unethical behaviours are understood to be rooted in personal and/or collective trauma. People are deeply supported to address this, both in themselves and in the systems they’re embedded in.
What role does language play in this society, particularly in relation to pronouns, labels, or identity terms?
With benign variation it’s possible to be more playful with language, rather than there being a sense that people have to use a limited number of words and agree on their meanings. There’s a culture of respecting the pronouns, names, labels and so on that feel the best fit for the person or community, and also of being open to this changing over time. There’s an open curiosity that asks ‘What does that mean for you (if you want to share)?’ rather than assuming.
There’s also a valuing of non verbal forms of communication at least as highly as verbal ones: helping people to find the ways of expressing themselves that are the best fit for them.
How do art, media, and literature reflect this model of benign variation? Are there distinct storytelling styles or themes that emerge?
There’s a much more diverse range of creativity that is valued, and no hierarchies around high/low art, or what counts as ‘proper’ art.
There has been quite a move away from linear storytelling which suggests people should be on paths towards certain kinds of ‘success’ or ‘happiness’ or ‘recovery’. Stories are often more cyclical and reflect the fact that there are inevitably times in our lives of more/less clarity, more ease and more challenge, endings and beginnings
There’s been a big move away from celebrity, towards recognising everyone’s value, and the value of small gestures, having/being enough, and easing suffering in simple ways
In a society free from heteronormativity, how is fashion affected? Do styles become more diverse, or is there a shift in how people use clothing to express themselves?
There are definitely more diverse styles and more diverse orientations to fashion. There’s acceptance and celebration of those who use clothing to express their energy or creativity, and those for whom it’s purely functional, and everything in between.
There is similar diversity in things like food and physical activity and creative pursuits: a recognition that it’s very meaningful and important to some, with support and community around that, but an acceptance that it’s fine for it to not be important as well.
How does the workplace accommodate or reflect this diversity in desires and relationships? Are there policies that support alternative family or relational structures?
Absolutely, for example there is a lot of support for people to take breaks from other forms of work to focus on outer/inner parenting or caring for themselves/others. There are some whose work is focused on these things.
People are always asked about who the close people and other beings in their lives are, rather than assuming any kind of relationship.
In housing, people are supported to find ways of living that are a good fit for them, with likeminded people. Support systems are embedded in these homes for when relational challenges inevitably come up. Such systems are viewed as vital as utilities like power and water.
How has this shift influenced global movements, such as feminism or LGBTQAI rights? Are these movements still distinct, or have they merged into broader frameworks?
With everyone recognising benign variation there are fewer movements around rights for particular marginalised groups. There are more movements towards everyone recognising and feeling their interconnectedness, and for addressing any remaining areas in the world where some are treated less well than others in any way.
Such movements are always led by those with lived experience, and the emphasis is on finding out what support they need around any challenges they still face and implementing that support.
When it comes to addressing any harms that still occur between people, and/or between people and other beings or the natural world, the emphasis is on hearing all of the stories and working together to heal trauma and to transform systems so that harm doesn’t continue.
In your view, what lessons can our current world learn from this other realm?
Everything! I want to live there! My only reservations are…
- We can’t ever really know for sure what would help. We need to embrace uncertainty and invite change, rather than creating new normativities to force on everyone in a further attempt to dominate and control. Even the kind of vision I’ve outlined here could lead to great suffering if it was made solid and static and grasped and imposed.
- Imagining such worlds can set up a gap between where we are and where we want to be. It feels really important to be with reality as it is, in order to be as wise and compassionate as possible with how things actually are. Otherwise there’s a risk that we end up constantly seeking for it to be how it was in some imagined past, or how we wish it could be in some imagined future (or parallel world). Can we recognise the deep pain and suffering that is present here without setting ourselves in opposition to this reality?
What would you say to someone in our reality, who is struggling to reconcile their sense of “normalcy” with this vision of diversity?
Start where you are. Whatever area you want to focus on (e.g. gender, sexuality, relationships, neurodiversity…), begin with deep self-reflection on the norms that you grew up with and those that are around in your culture at the moment. Explore how these have hurt you and disconnected you from yourself, others and the world. Then, instead of opposition, you can get alongside others who’re striving for justice and diversity in this area, and all areas.
The final chapter of the new edition of my book Rewriting the Rules, explores how we might take the first tender and tentative steps towards this kind of work, individually and collectively.
COMMENTS ARE OFF THIS POST