" 

 :, I do not view the following content as heteronormative: ""The vagina plays a significant role in human female sexuality and sexual pleasure. During sexual arousal, vaginal moisture is increased by vaginal lubrication, which reduces friction and allows for smoother penetration of the vagina during sexual activity. The texture of the vaginal walls create friction for the penis during sexual intercourse and stimulate it toward ejaculation, enabling fertilization. In addition, a variety of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and other disorders can affect the vagina. Because of the risk of STIs, safe sex practices are recommended."" 

 :If I viewed it in such a way, I would have fixed it. The WP:Lead sentence states, ""The vagina allows for sexual intercourse and childbirth. It channels menstrual flow, which occurs periodically as part of the menstrual cycle."" The paragraph that you take issue with is simply noting the sexual production aspect of the vagina. The "" During sexual arousal, vaginal moisture is increased by vaginal lubrication, which reduces friction and allows for smoother penetration of the vagina during sexual activity."" part of it alludes to no sexual orientation. The penis-vagina part is noted after that for obvious reasons  sexual production. I have no issue with lesbian sexual practices content being mentioned in the Sexual activity section, as long as it is formatted better than the way you had it. And I already objected to your ""For more information on the cultural aspects and views of FGM, see the Reasons for vaginal modification section."" sentence above, and yet you re-added it and I reverted it again. Editors can clearly see from that the table of contents that this section exists. And when re-adding a little bit of material, you re-added the inconsistent citation styles here and here. I'll fix that, but I was hoping that you wouldn't re-add the material until you used citation templates for that material.    

 "