There is often a confusion between norms, and normal.
The latter was demonstrated to me by a biology lecturer (very pointedly after a comment by me) - he drew out a bell curve to demonstrate the statistical occurrence of shoe sizes in men. On the bell curve you can plot various statistical points, but at what point do you say a particular shoe size is ‘not normal’?
You can use the pornography exemplar - ‘I don’t know how to define pornography, but I know it when I see it’. But this can be very subjective too - my definition is very wide (anything where anyone gets sexual pleasure from it, and could be used for self-pleasuring) but very subjective too. It could range from a glimpse of an ankle to a full on bondage scene, complete with a clown drenched in custard who is flaggelating a Mexican donkey with a cat-o-nine tails made out of celery. We might think neither are normal (and I would agree with you) but a statistical biologist would just plot them on a curve.
We are seeing now is subjective definitions of what is normal or not - I don’t think Ru Pauls drag race (as someone else raised it) as being abnormal. Crap and rather weird, but not abnormal. FFS I was raised with Dame Edna Everidge so that’s a big ’meh‘ from me.
In other matters I defer to the science - in others yet I keep my gob shut and listen, and learn. Sharing an office with a guy who is in the most loving and committed marriage I have ever seen in my life, with another guy, has taught me that my biases need to be carefully examined from time to time.