There are those who want (and need) the world to be neatly categorised and defined. Binary descriptions of black and white concepts are all very well, but we all know that it doesn't reflect life in any way. With all the shades of grey in between (more than fifty of them, obviously), it's easy to pick out the more distinctive shades, but harder to pinpoint the filler in between. It's much easier to find the distinguishing features of abnormality than to identify the features that equate to someone "normal". But if normality means that you become an anonymous no one amongst a world of individuals, does that not make you abnormal too? So why be normal? Why be Sue?
There is nothing "normal" about sexuality. Wherever we fit on its vast spectrum and however we decide to practice it, there is little in the world that reflects our individuality more than how we express our unifying sexual drive. Applying the mere concept of normality to sex in any way is to undermine it - because what exactly is "normal sex"? It's so subjective that it's undefinable. And seeing as we're still a society that likes to keep the details of our sex lives behind closed doors, what's the point of worrying if what you and your partner do is normal, when no one else is involved to pass any kind of judgement? And even if they were, would it matter?
The pressures of "normality" extend far beyond the bedroom of course. People across all demographics feel the pressure to project an image of normality from their dress sense and interests right through to their entire personal identity. On the one hand, fashion is lauded as a healthy cycle of trends that keeps creative industries fresh, but on the other, due to people's influence by and adherence to fashion, it enforces that ideal of normality even further. The fashions of my teens have long since dissipated - though I'm pretty sure centre-parted bowl cuts with wet-look gel will make a comeback eventually - but doesn't it take someone daring to not be normal to push fashion toward making it so? Remember the uproar when the first three-quarter length trousers appeared in shops? Then remember how every man wore them for about three years and then, suddenly... Gone. Someone at some point dared to not be normal by lopping off their trouser legs mid-shin. What a trailblazer. )
So who actually wants to be Sue? Well Sue does. And there's nothing wrong with that. But if given the choice to be normal for normal's sake, or to express individuality and celebrate our difference, wouldn't every stable person prefer to be one in a million and not one of a million? I know I certainly would. So why be normal? Why be Sue?