24

Even though heterosexual and straight are interchangeable in most contexts, there are times when I find myself wanting to distinguish between an attraction to the opposite sex which is exclusive and one which isn’t exclusive.

In my own experience, straight certainly means “exclusively attracted to the opposite sex.” Thus, a “straight” woman is attracted only to men and never to women. It would therefore seem to me incorrect to describe a woman who has been involved with both men and women as “straight”.

But couldn’t one rightly describe such a woman as heterosexual?

Given the literal meaning of that word’s roots, I feel as though one ᴏᴜɢʜᴛ to be able to use heterosexual to mean someone “attracted to the opposite sex” without implications about lack of attraction to the same sex.

The same thing goes for gay versus homosexual: one ᴏᴜɢʜᴛ to be able to use homosexual to mean someone “attracted to the same sex” without any implication about a lack of attraction to the opposite sex.

The Question

Is this idea backed up by usage? Do some people, sources, and so on make this distinction in meaning? Or does English not have an easy way to express what I’m talking about here?

12 Answers 12

32

Straight is a metaphor, and means heterosexual only in a limited set of contexts.
Most of the time it doesn't mean that.

  • It's 20 miles straight North to the border.
  • I'm pretty sure she's been straight with me about that.
  • Stand up straight and look straight ahead.
  • Honestly, you're such a straight arrow; would it kill you to ignore that stuff?
  • Be sure to position it straight up; we don't want to have to brace it.

The metaphor theme is Morality is a Straight Line, which is part of Life is a Journey.
The unspoken, but very prominent, presupposition of this metaphor theme is that homosexuality
is immoral, while heterosexuality is moral, and therefore straight.

18

In common usage (which at the end of the day is what matters - we communicate to get a point across), heterosexual and straight are synonymous. That is, if a person is described as either, they are assumed to be exclusively attracted to the opposite gender; if a relationship is described as such ("He's in a heterosexual relationship right now"), generally it only implies that this particular relationship is one between a male and a female.

In terms of expressing attraction to one gender without further implications: "gynephilic" and "androphilic" and/or "gynesexual" and "androsexual" are words that are often used, or simply "men who have sex with men" (edit: note that this refers to action and not attraction, which appears to be your intention) as has been mentioned, since it makes no mention of sexual orientation. However, in conversation it's probably easier to just say "he likes girls".

  • 5
    It's worth noting that there is a distinction between "men who have sex with men" and "androphilic." In principle a person may experience sexual attraction to males and not act on it; or conversely a man may have sex with men for some reason other than sexual attraction (e.g. ritualistic sex). – D Coetzee Jul 15 '12 at 5:56
  • @DerrickCoetzee This is true, and as the original question was about attraction as opposed to action, that's a very relevant point. Will clarify my original answer, thanks! – Key Jul 15 '12 at 5:59
6

No, in English, "heterosexual" and "straight" are synonymous, with each of "homosexual," "bisexual," and "asexual" being in a separate "quadrant of sexuality." One cannot fall into more than one of these categories.

  • 3
    Well... sure you can. And you've neglected other "quadrants" if you must call them that, such as trans, intersex, two-spirited, queer... – JAM Jul 15 '12 at 3:44
  • 4
    All that is just made-up stuff. All there is human behavior, not these invented modern categories. That’s why health workers talk about “men who have sex with men”. It doesn’t assume anything at all. – tchrist Jul 15 '12 at 4:05
  • 4
    I didn't say everyone fell into one of these categories, you'll note, just that these four in particular are mutually exclusive. – James McLeod Jul 15 '12 at 4:26
  • 3
    And note that these descriptions also make no assumptions. That is left to the ignorant who misuse them as labels. – James McLeod Jul 15 '12 at 4:36
  • 2
    There are people who use "straight" in the sense of "attracted to the opposite sex in some capacity", and as such, they state that straight asexuals are a thing. (This seems useful in certain activism-related problems that come up, it seems.) – Maroon Aug 13 '15 at 1:04
5

Folks who at various times in their lives display gynesexual characteristics and at other times display androsexual characteristics are amphisexuals — or simply human, if you prefer a shorter word. Human sexuality is a fluid continuum, not a Boolean characteristic.

Particularly when used as noun rather than as adjectively, words like homosexual and heterosexual carry heavy connotations of morality, exclusivity, culture, identity, and expression. They work better to describe relationships or acts than they do to describe people. Used to describe people, these terms can easily come off sounding judgemental, and are seldom 100% accurate in all regards anyway.

Someone who is sexually attracted to one gender may or may not be sexually attracted to the other gender, and they may or may not be sexually repulsed by the other gender. They may form romantic attachments with only one gender yet engage in sexual behavior with both. Finally, all this is much more fluid than the clinical-sounding terms may suggest, as even within the same individual it can vary significantly with time and circumstance.

For example, I have personally known both men and women who identify as “straight”, yet who sometimes engage in non-romantic sexual activity with members of their same sex. Clearly, they are not repulsed by their own sex, yet at the same time they do not consider themselves “bisexual”. Indeed, they reject that term if applied to them, probably because of the social connotations, and perhaps because they do not form romantic relationships with their own sex.

This actually works the other direction, too. I’ve also known both men and women who, despite self-identifying as “gay”, have been known to have sexual (but not romantic) relations with members of the opposite sex. These folks might be somewhat less likely to reject the “bisexual” label with quite the same vehemence as the corresponding self-identifying “straight” people often are. But they still think it a mere technicality, and so do not change their constructed cultural identification just because of some occasional dalliance outside of that consensus construct.

I’m reminded of this bit of dialogue from the musical Hair:

Prison Psychiatrist: And men?
Woof: What do you mean...?
Prison Psychiatrist: You have any sexual attraction towards men?
Woof: You mean if I'm a homosexual or something like that?
Prison Psychiatrist: Yeah.
Woof: Well, I wouldn't kick Mick Jagger out of my bed, but uh, I'm not a homosexual, no.

Probably that could stand some updating for today’s audiences, swapping in someone younger for Mick Jagger, but the expressed sentiment is ageless.

3

I have some doubts about straight and heterosexual being exactly synonymous, though they do overlap a lot.

Heterosexual/homosexual are not polar. People are not 100% one or the other. There are degrees in between, usually graded as homosocial(likes the company of their own sex) > homoerotic(gets excited by their own sex) > homosexual(has sexual relations with their own sex).

If we accept this homosexual continuum, then straight and heterosexual do not have to be identical. A "bromance" for example, (my apologies for using such a ridiculous word...) is probably straight as in 'normal' and not sexual, but not strictly speaking heterosexual as it is taking homosocial to extremes. Another example is the WW I poetry of Siegfried Sassoon, which is undoubtedly straight but still verging on homoerotic.

In the same light, it is worth bearing in mind that while male/female are polar and genetic, male and female are social constructs and therefore not polar. Think drag queens, lady-boys, ladettes, etc.

  • 3
    +1 for recognizing that human sexuality AND gender is a spectrum, not a constant. – Brandon Bertelsen Jul 15 '12 at 10:45
  • Siegfried (who was probably gay), not Vidal who just died and used to cut Jean Shrimpton's & Twiggy's hair - though it's a funny Monty Python image. – jitard Jul 15 '12 at 19:50
  • Whoops... my bad! Yes, Seigfried, who some speculate simply must have been gay because of his poetry, but it is completely unproven. – Roaring Fish Jul 16 '12 at 7:05
2

Straight in terms of sexuality is more likely the opposite of 'kinky'. So, you could have a 'straight' homosexual, or a 'kinky' homosexual. Or more to the point, a 'straight' heterosexual, or a 'kinky, not straight' heterosexual.

  • 3
    I more commonly hear "vanilla" used as the opposite of "kinky," probably because it avoids this ambiguity. It's a shame because "straight" and "kinky" make a better pair of metaphors. – octern Jul 15 '12 at 4:22
2

Straight is simply a slang term for somebody who is predominantly heterosexual. In ten years from now, the term "straight" may no longer exist as slang for the same just as it probably didn't in the middle ages :).

2

As others have noted, heterosexual and straight both refer to the portion of the heterosexual–homosexual continuum where one is predominately attracted to the opposite sex. The two words vary somewhat in connotation and register, so they are not exact synonyms, but neither one suggests significant homosexual activity, nor do they rule out past or incidental homosexual activity.

If you would like a term that specifically suggests more openness to homosexuality, consider heteroflexible or bi-curious:

Heteroflexibility is a form of a sexual orientation or situational sexual behavior characterized by minimal homosexual activity despite a primarily heterosexual sexual orientation that is considered to distinguish it from bisexuality. It has been characterized as “mostly straight.” Although sometimes equated with bi-curiosity to describe a broad continuum of sexual orientation between heterosexuality and bisexuality, other authors distinguish heteroflexibility as lacking the “wish to experiment with . . . sexuality” implied by the bi-curious label. The corresponding situation in which homosexual activity predominates has also been described, termed homoflexibility.

Straight but not narrow is a similar idiom used to describe people who are heterosexual but open-minded about homosexuality.

2

Barbara Kipfer & Robert Chapman, Dictionary of American Slang, fourth edition (2007) does a nice job (if you can get past the "sexually deviant" wording) of suggesting the array of meanings straight can have as a slang term:

straight adj 1 Unmixed; undiluted; NEAT [example omitted] (1874+) 2 Not using narcotics; not addicted; CLEAN (1950s+ Narcotics) 3 Having had a narcotics dose, esp the first one of the day [example omitted] (1946+ Narcotics) 4 Heterosexual; not sexually deviant (1941+ fr homosexuals) 5 True; honest and direct [example omitted] (1530+) n A tobacco cigarette; SQUARE (1960s+ Musicians & students)

So when Jonathan Richman sings, in his 1976 song "I'm Straight,"

So this phone call today concerns Hippie Johnny./He's always stoned; he's never straight./I saw you today, you know, walk by with Hippie Johnny./Look, I had to call up and say, I want to take his place./See, he's stoned—Hippie Johnny./Now get this: I'm straight, and I want to take his place.../Now I've watched you walk around here. I've watched you meet/Your boyfriends (I know) and you tell me how they're deep./Look but, I think, if these guys, if they're really so great,/Tell me why can't they at least take this place and take it straight?/Why always stoned, like Hippie Johnny?/I'm straight, and I want to take his place./I'm certainly not stoned, like Hippie Johnny is./I'm straight, and I want to take his place...

he's using it, in the finest poetical tradition, to imply perhaps every sense of straight in the Kipfer & Chapman entry except "having had a narcotics dose" and "a tobacco cigarette." He's certainly not limiting himself exclusively—or even primarily—to the narrow meaning "heterosexual."

1

In the sixties there could be some confusion between straight as in "straight arrow" & not hip and gay & straight.

I believe it was when gay was first being used as a polite version of queer that straight seemed to pop up as its opposite. Queer had more restricted in use, it was a sort of a form of tagging. I don't think queer & straight were used as opposites.

"Straight acting" is a term that has a controversial history of its own - like "passing."

And I agree with the comments above about there being such a extended continuum of sexuality that there is no pure sexual response - it's all tinged with various admixtures.

1

"Straight" and "Heterosexual" are clearly not etymological synonyms, even in the context of sexuality as they arose quite separately and are only loosely tied in certain contexts (but never equivalent, in my opinion).

"Straight" is many times employed in a moral sense for much more than sexuality; "Nah, man, I'm straight" can be a refutation of drugs as well. This use was made popular by the Straight Edge subculture of hardcore punk that abstains from alcohol, drugs, and promiscuous sexual behavior. Their use of the word 'Straight' was appropriated from previous usages of the word.

This usage hearkens back to 'strait and narrow', in print in 1706 and 1712 (likely in use before then), and means "A conventional and law-abiding course."

in A Vindication of the Government in Scotland: During the Reign of King Charles II, 1712: "Strait and narrow is the way that leadeth unto life."

- Strait and Narrow Etymology

From this context, especially those who typically employ it, the 'conventional' / 'straight' lifestyle does mean fully heterosexual; not mostly heterosexual, not bi-curious, etc. It also does not include drug use, or promiscuous sex (even of the heterosexual variety).

Heterosexual, by contrast, lacks the moral judgments or 'lifestyle' assumptions that go along with "straight" - as examples, you could be a heterosexual prostitute (not "straight" sexually - promiscuity and premarital sex were not on the 'strait and narrow' path), or a heterosexual drug user (not "straight" in lifestyle), or completely asexual by choice (for example, a chaste priest would also be considered "straight" by lifestyle).

The term "heterosexual" was first published in 1892 in C.G. Chaddock's translation of Krafft-Ebing's "Psychopathia Sexualis". The noun came into use from the early 1920s, but did not enter common use until the 1960s. The colloquial shortening "hetero" is attested from 1933.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterosexuality#Etymology

Further, you could easily be 'mostly heterosexual', 'somewhat heterosexual', 'occasionally heterosexual', and other qualifiers that expose the fluid concept of sexuality, which is in sharp contrast to the binary nature of 'straight' vs. 'not straight' as a moral concept.

  • 1
    You can also be mostly straight or occasionally straight or straight-curious, etc. And heterosexual is quite commonly used in ways that include just as much moral judgment as straight does. As used by the vast majority of people, however, neither straight nor heterosexual carries any more or less moral judgment than the other, nor is one any more binary than the other. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Aug 12 '15 at 23:37
  • No, they aren't equivalent like that. For example, with the 'Straight Edge' group (link above), you either are Straight Edge, or you aren't. If you are using drugs, drinking alcohol, or having promiscuous sex, you are not 'Straight Edge' (though you could perhaps go Straight Edge again). Ask a religious person whether someone who is 'mostly straight', but occasionally has homosexual sex 'is straight'. Likely their answer will be no, as would mine (though I'm not religious). As previously mentioned, 'heterosexual' and 'homosexual' still apply in the animal kingdom, while 'straight' doesn't. – Ehryk Aug 12 '15 at 23:43
  • Through historical usage alone, 'straight' (as borne from 'strait and narrow') does carry moral judgement, where hetero- and homo- sexuality (as borne from scientific literature - Psychopathia Sexualis circa 1892) and lack, at least historically, moral connotations, even if some attempt to add it today. – Ehryk Aug 12 '15 at 23:47
  • 1
    The historical origins of a word are irrelevant to how it is currently used and how people understand it. That's what's known as the etymological fallacy. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Aug 12 '15 at 23:50
  • 1
    Yes, I've heard “I'm straight” being used like that, too. I never said I hadn't. What I'm saying is that the vast majority of speakers consider these two different uses of “I'm straight” to be completely unrelated. One is a statement of moral or life-style choices (I've also heard militant vegans use it to describe veganism, which is even more obviously moralising), while the other is a simple statement of sexuality. Completely unrelated. Just like there's no element of bragging or moral superiority when you answer the question “How are you?” with “I'm good”. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Aug 13 '15 at 0:04
1

There is a term for a lesbian who has never had sex with men: "gold star." This is sometimes generalized to any homosexual who has never had heterosexual intercourse. The term would be meaningless if gay/lesbian was exactly synonymous with [an exclusively] homosexual [person].

Kinsey demonstrated that latent sexualities frequently exist and that some people have mixed desires. Whether straight is synonymous with [an exclusively] heterosexual [person], really depends on your world-view/identity politics.

  • 2
    Why would the term be meaningless if gay/lesbian is synonymous with homosexual? A ‘gold star’ is a homosexual who's never had sex with someone of the opposite sex; doesn't matter if you call them gay/lesbian or homosexual. There are many, many exclusively gay/lesbian/homosexual people who have had heterosexual intercourse. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Aug 12 '15 at 23:31

protected by tchrist Sep 26 '12 at 18:35

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.