Reclaiming Lesbian Pride

[Kobi]

With the interest sparked by the discussion in the leaping thread, I was wondering whether it might be worth starting a thread on reclaiming lesbian pride - sans all the qualifiers.

It feels kind of good, reaffirming, empowering to just talk about being a lesbian and seeing the word being used more freely.

Was also interesting to see talk about the history of the lesbian feminist movement. So much history I have forgotten about. I miss talking about it.

Any one have any thoughts, feelings, ideas, news that might fit well here?

[JustJo]

I'll be back in the morning, after some coffee...but, yes... :)

There is just one life for each of us: our own.
~Euripides

I see being a lesbian as one small facet of the complex person that I am...and that living my own life, as my authentic self, undefined by others...is immense. :rrose:

[clay]

hey all...just a plain ole lesbian who is "butch"...and am so confused, but respectful, with all the terms...why can't I just be recognized as a woman loving woman...without all the "designer labels"...what is wrong with that? Whatever we may "identify" as in the confines of closed doors is between the two of us! That is my story and I am sticking to it! I am not here to "argue" or "derail" or anything except be recognized as a plain ole lesbian! PROUD lesbian! Thanks, Kobi!

[Kobi]

hey all...just a plain ole lesbian who is "butch"...and am so confused, but respectful, with all the terms...why can't I just be recognized as a woman loving woman...without all the "designer labels"...what is wrong with that? Whatever we may "identify" as in the confines of closed doors is between the two of us! That is my story and I am sticking to it! I am not here to "argue" or "derail" or anything except be recognized as a plain ole lesbian! PROUD lesbian! Thanks, Kobi!

Welcome clay! The labels can be a little confusing for sure. I'm still trying to figure out what a FIB is.

Plain ole proud lesbian works for me!

[clay]

Tanks, Kobi!
Let me know if ya find out that meaning...lol...have a great day...ClayWelcome clay! The labels can be a little confusing for sure. I'm still trying to figure out what a FIB is.

Plain ole proud lesbian works for me!

[weatherboi]

FIB=female identified butch

[Kobi]

FIB=female identified butch



Thanks for the info LOL. In my isolated, antiquated everyday world, all the butches are female identified. Hence using such a term or acronym would be redundant.

I feel like such a dinosaur some days.

[The_Lady_Snow]

FIB is a term I only seen when joining online communities FIB equated to woman identified butch... There seemed to be a need to separate them from MIB (male identified butch). What I mean by separation is online there seemed to be this need to distinct one from the other. I had a hard time learning the verbiage since where I came from or grew where butch equated woman period.

I think the internets introduced us to many gender, label, identity forums discussions and threads such as this. It's a hard road when dealing with all the new verbiage out there and yes sometimes it feels we (women) are continuously put in the back burner. I think threads like this and the discussions being had will not let that happen:)

[tapu]

I always read it as FBI.

[Kobi]

FIB is a term I only seen when joining online communities FIB equated to woman identified butch... There seemed to be a need to separate them from MIB (male identified butch). What I mean by separation is online there seemed to be this need to distinct one from the other. I had a hard time learning the verbiage since where I came from or grew where butch equated woman period.

I think the internets introduced us to many gender, label, identity forums discussions and threads such as this. It's a hard road when dealing with all the new verbiage out there and yes sometimes it feels we (women) are continuously put in the back burner. I think threads like this and the discussions being had will not let that happen:)



Welcome Snow!

Your thoughts are much appreciated. The words, phrases, acronyms and such used in communities on the internet is truly a learning experience.

Sometimes, I wish there was a reference page here that listed them all and their definitions. It would help me not feel like I am reading a foreign language LOL.

And, if we had a reference sheet I wouldn't think MIB is referring to the movie Men In Black. Dinosaur I tell ya.

I wont even tell ya what I thought FIB meant.

[msW8ing]

First..awesome thread idea..It doesn't matter how hard I try..I cannot keep up with all the different ID's now and days..I guess because I treat everyone as individuals but always respect thier choices..I admire some for thier convictions and not backing down. Personally I prefer to call myself a lesbian because for myself putting a lable on me is like trying to describe myself in one little box..it just can't be done..I'm ever evolving and learning and growing and changing. But the one thing I"m sure of..I have always been attracted to butch/masculine women..reminded of a conversation I had with my daughter not too long ago. She was asking what my "type" was..I thought for a moment and said well it's kinda like this...I prefer them like my bread...hard and crusty on the outside but soft and warm on the inside. She laughed hysterically of course and said lets go get some lunch. But it's true. I adore a hard looking butch/masculine woman who is a soft, gooshy, romantic on the inside. Just my .02 cents.

[OS Butch]

I always gravitate to the threads that are in the Lesbian Zone.
It always stuck me as odd when people wonder why there is a need for this or that kind of thread.
Coming out 35 years ago, I didn't then and still don't mind the term Lesbian. It actually is my preference in terms referring to myself....I tack on Butch and have in the past used WI (Woman Identified) and joke that it did not mean Wisconsin:) . FIB..... hmmm.. I assume there is a difference in being female identified and woman identified.... I really don't care. I am a Butch Lesbian.. or is it Lesbian Butch? WTH...

Hi, I am Joan, aka Jo, much easier:) I am the person to whom you are speaking. :)

[Kobi]

First..awesome thread idea..It doesn't matter how hard I try..I cannot keep up with all the different ID's now and days..I guess because I treat everyone as individuals but always respect thier choices..I admire some for thier convictions and not backing down. Personally I prefer to call myself a lesbian because for myself putting a lable on me is like trying to describe myself in one little box..it just can't be done..I'm ever evolving and learning and growing and changing. But the one thing I"m sure of..I have always been attracted to butch/masculine women..reminded of a conversation I had with my daughter not too long ago. She was asking what my "type" was..I thought for a moment and said well it's kinda like this...I prefer them like my bread...hard and crusty on the outside but soft and warm on the inside. She laughed hysterically of course and said lets go get some lunch. But it's true. I adore a hard looking butch/masculine woman who is a soft, gooshy, romantic on the inside. Just my .02 cents.


Welcome MsW. And thank you for introducing us to Butch Bread. :) I will have to see if the bakery carries any LOL.

Is it possible FIB might mean female in bread? Or do I, perhaps, just need sleep?

[msW8ing]

Welcome MsW. And thank you for introducing us to Butch Bread. :) I will have to see if the bakery carries any LOL.

Is it possible FIB might mean female in bread? Or do I, perhaps, just need sleep?





Oh my dear Kobi, how you make me laugh..I so needed that this Sunday morning. I adore your humor.

[Kobi]

I always gravitate to the threads that are in the Lesbian Zone.
It always stuck me as odd when people wonder why there is a need for this or that kind of thread.
Coming out 35 years ago, I didn't then and still don't mind the term Lesbian. It actually is my preference in terms referring to myself....I tack on Butch and have in the past used WI (Woman Identified) and joke that it did not mean Wisconsin:) . FIB..... hmmm.. I assume there is a difference in being female identified and woman identified.... I really don't care. I am a Butch Lesbian.. or is it Lesbian Butch? WTH...

Hi, I am Joan, aka Jo, much easier:) I am the person to whom you are speaking. :)

Welcome Jo! I hear you. It struck me odd as well.

Then again, we all had different experiences, opportunities, and needs in developing our own unique "queerness". These are reflected in so many different ways in our lives and identities these days.

The complexities to which I am exposed to via the internet never cease to amaze and confuse me. I like simple. Then again, my definition of simple may not be the same as someone else's.

I have always been comfortable with lesbian. It seems the more accurate description of my reality and experience. I have tried adding qualifiers to it but they just don't feel right/accurate and they can feel very confining to me. Using lesbian, to me, gives me more freedom to express who I am without being locked into anything or pigeonholed into anything. It's liberating.

Thank you for bringing up WI (not Wisconsin). I dont know if there is a difference between WI and FI - I'm pretty sure someone knows but it sure as heck isn't me. LOL.

I'd like to see more activity in the lesbian zone. I'm just not sure what direction it should/could go in. Have any suggestions?

[Kobi]

Oh my dear Kobi, how you make me laugh..I so needed that this Sunday morning. I adore your humor.


MsW, I want you to know, I stopped by the bakery section of the market on my way home today. I asked the cute little dyke behind the counter where I could find the Butch bread with the hard crust and soft, squishy insides.

She wasnt a dyke. She did not find Butch bread to be amusing. And, I think, I now have a reputation for being the crazy lady with early Alzheimers.

I really should check my files and see if the recall notice for my gaydar is still active. :jester:

[DapperButch]

I always gravitate to the threads that are in the Lesbian Zone.
It always stuck me as odd when people wonder why there is a need for this or that kind of thread.
Coming out 35 years ago, I didn't then and still don't mind the term Lesbian. It actually is my preference in terms referring to myself....I tack on Butch and have in the past used WI (Woman Identified) and joke that it did not mean Wisconsin:) . FIB..... hmmm.. I assume there is a difference in being female identified and woman identified.... I really don't care. I am a Butch Lesbian.. or is it Lesbian Butch? WTH...Hi, I am Joan, aka Jo, much easier:) I am the person to whom you are speaking. :)

Welcome Jo! I hear you. It struck me odd as well.

Then again, we all had different experiences, opportunities, and needs in developing our own unique "queerness". These are reflected in so many different ways in our lives and identities these days.

The complexities to which I am exposed to via the internet never cease to amaze and confuse me. I like simple. Then again, my definition of simple may not be the same as someone else's.

I have always been comfortable with lesbian. It seems the more accurate description of my reality and experience. I have tried adding qualifiers to it but they just don't feel right/accurate and they can feel very confining to me. Using lesbian, to me, gives me more freedom to express who I am without being locked into anything or pigeonholed into anything. It's liberating.

Thank you for bringing up WI (not Wisconsin). I dont know if there is a difference between WI and FI - I'm pretty sure someone knows but it sure as heck isn't me. LOL.I'd like to see more activity in the lesbian zone. I'm just not sure what direction it should/could go in. Have any suggestions?

Some people regard the term female = sex and woman = gender.

There are definitely butches who define as female, but not as women. I defined that way for many years and know quite a many butch who still does. Here the term woman is seen as being connected to a social construct, rather than it being connected to one's biology.

(Hope you were actually asking the question?)

[tapu]

SRSLY? Those are known, culturally-shared distinctions? Isn't it awfully easy for people not versed in it to screw it up?

[DapperButch]

SRSLY? Those are known, culturally-shared distinctions? Isn't it awfully easy for people not versed in it to screw it up?

Hey, tapu. Yes, and yes! :-) Identifiers are like that.

I am going to step out of the lesbian zone. I am not looking to have a discussion on this, I was only looking to answer the question, as I think that Kobi was sincerely curious.

Have a good day. :hangloose:

[tapu]

Well... there's a real difference between the kind of identifiers you are listing and the set of widely used identifiers of gender and sex in our culture.

If this isn't the place to go into it, though, I'm fine with that.

Thanks DB. :)


ER... Wait a minute. You seem to have edited your original post on this. I've been responding to the original, where you listed more configurations of gender/sex identifiers.

[Kobi]

Some people regard the term female = sex and woman = gender.

There are definitely butches who define as female, but not as women. They often see butch as their gender.

Just like there are some who identify as female (their sex) , as a butch (their gender), and as a woman (their gender).

Hopes that helped (I am assuming you were actually wondering?). :-)



Thanks Dapper! I knew someone would have the answer.

This kind of illustrates why I prefer to stick with lesbian - by todays standards, I think, it indicates quite clearly gender, sex, and orientation in one word.

Then again, I could be wrong about that too. LOL. I should see if there is a remedial lesbian course somewhere.

[tapu]

Ah! Kobi has the original post. Now I don't sound quite so stupid....

[DapperButch]

Well... there's a real difference between the kind of identifiers you are listing and the set of widely used identifiers of gender and sex in our culture.

If this isn't the place to go into it, though, I'm fine with that.

Thanks DB. :)


ER... Wait a minute. You seem to have edited your original post on this. I've been responding to the original, where you listed more configurations of gender/sex identifiers.

Ah! Kobi has the original post. Now I don't sound quite so stupid....

Yes, I edited b/c I felt like I was throwing too much info. out there when I really didn't want to get into a discussion about it. I felt that I was already being intrusive by writing in the lesbian zone, so I was seeking a way to give Kobi a short answer without having discussion follow. I did not want to say anything that would derail from any direction you all might have wanted to take this thread.



Thanks Dapper! I knew someone would have the answer.

This kind of illustrates why I prefer to stick with lesbian - by todays standards, I think, it indicates quite clearly gender, sex, and orientation in one word.

Yes, I agree, Kobi. Lesbian is pretty clear cut!
Then again, I could be wrong about that too. LOL. I should see if there is a remedial lesbian course somewhere.

[msW8ing]

MsW, I want you to know, I stopped by the bakery section of the market on my way home today. I asked the cute little dyke behind the counter where I could find the Butch bread with the hard crust and soft, squishy insides.

She wasnt a dyke. She did not find Butch bread to be amusing. And, I think, I now have a reputation for being the crazy lady with early Alzheimers.

I really should check my files and see if the recall notice for my gaydar is still active. :jester:


Do not feel alone on this one Kobi..I used to have gaydar that was sharp as a tact..now in my old age I'm thinking it's dull and rusty. Of course I'm thinking most of my mind is getting dull and rusty. When my daughter has to point out to me I'm being flirted with..and I look at said flirter and all I can think is.."they are not much older than my own kids". That just puts the :cherry: on the sundae.

[Kobi]

Yes, I edited b/c I felt like I was throwing too much info. out there when I really didn't want to get into a discussion about it. I felt that I was already being intrusive by writing in the lesbian zone, so I was seeking a way to give Kobi a short answer without having discussion follow. I did not want to say anything that would derail from any direction you all might have wanted to take this thread.



Dapper,

You mean I did get the definition of lesbian correct? I am pleased.

Thank you for being respectful. It is much appreciated. Tho, please keeping looking in and helping out. That is appreciated as well. :)

[OS Butch]

Some people regard the term female = sex and woman = gender.

There are definitely butches who define as female, but not as women. I defined that way for many years and know quite a many butch who still does. Here the term woman is seen as being connected to a social construct, rather than it being connected to one's biology.

(Hope you were actually asking the question?)

I was actually asking. Thanks for responding. For me, I am both, female, woman and Butch to boot! What a deal I am!

[OS Butch]

Yes, I edited b/c I felt like I was throwing too much info. out there when I really didn't want to get into a discussion about it. I felt that I was already being intrusive by writing in the lesbian zone, so I was seeking a way to give Kobi a short answer without having discussion follow. I did not want to say anything that would derail from any direction you all might have wanted to take this thread.

Really? I do really appreciate any enlightenment on these issues no matter who is giving it or how they identify..... Although I have had issues with my local friends that would tell me how I should be raising my kid....and they never had kids....But that is for another thread:)

[CherylNYC]

I was actually asking. Thanks for responding. For me, I am both, female, woman and Butch to boot! What a deal I am!

Three for the price of one. That sounds like quite the deal, indeed.

[T4Texas]

reclaiming lesbian pride ?




Reclaiming it? I don't feel like I ever lost it.

[Chazz]

For the sake of clarity, and in the the spirit of reclaiming lesbian heritage and grammatical correctness - neoPolitical Correctness be damned (I never signed on for that, anyway):


female/woman (noun) = sex/biology
male/man (noun) = sex/biology

lesbian (noun) = a woman of same sex, sexual orientation

feminine/masculine (adj.) = gender

femme (noun) = female lesbian
butch (noun) = female lesbian who expresses female "masculinity"

transgender (verb) = moving along a gender continuum.

transgender person (noun) = a person of either sex, who may be lesbian, gay or straight.

Using adjectives as nouns is not good grammar, nor is it good politics. It just muddies the water. Non-lesbians, who lay claim to lesbian descriptors, are the ones obliged to clarify through expanded labeling.

[tapu]

Damn. You're good. :)

I'd object (mildly) to your adj/noun edict on a number of grounds--most notably, that you blur the distinction while making it--but I think this is nicely laid out.

Question: Sex = gender? They were distinguished above, I believe, at one point, but (without doing any research) I think they do equate.

[Kobi]

For the sake of clarity, and in the the spirit of reclaiming lesbian heritage and grammatical correctness - neoPolitical Correctness be damned (I never signed on for that, anyway):


female/woman (noun) = sex/biology
male/man (noun) = sex/biology

lesbian (noun) = a woman of same sex, sexual orientation

feminine/masculine (adj.) = gender

femme (noun) = female lesbian
butch (noun) = female lesbian who expresses female "masculinity"

transgender (verb) = moving along a gender continuum.

transgender person (noun) = a person of either sex, who may be lesbian, gay or straight.

Using adjectives as nouns is not good grammar, nor is it good politics. It just muddies the water. Non-lesbians, who lay claim to lesbian descriptors, are the ones obliged to clarify through expanded labeling.


Chazz,

I think I understand your intent in posting this. However, it could be seen as a supportive thing or a controversial thing or a little bit of both.

I dont want to presume something here. So, could you elaborate a bit on your intent?

[OS Butch]

Well, I am not an English Major or writer nor do I know much about grammatics or being politically correct for that matter, but I don't agree with a couple of the items. So, maybe I will say this is how they are for me.

An adjective modifies a noun (http://www.uottawa.ca/academic/arts/writcent/hypergrammar/nouns.html#noun) or a pronoun (http://www.uottawa.ca/academic/arts/writcent/hypergrammar/pronouns.html#pronoun) by describing, identifying, or quantifying words. An adjective usually precedes the noun or the pronoun which it modifies.

A noun is a word used to name a person, animal, place, thing, and abstract idea.

In that light, both Butch and Lesbian are adjectives for me as they describe parts of me, not all of me....Butch Lesbian Woman

Hey! Is that a new acronym? BLW? Cool beans:)

For the sake of clarity, and in the the spirit of reclaiming lesbian heritage and grammatical correctness - neoPolitical Correctness be damned (I never signed on for that, anyway):


female/woman (noun) = sex/biology
male/man (noun) = sex/biology

lesbian (noun) = a woman of same sex, sexual orientation

feminine/masculine (adj.) = gender

femme (noun) = female lesbian
butch (noun) = female lesbian who expresses female "masculinity"

transgender (verb) = moving along a gender continuum.

transgender person (noun) = a person of either sex, who may be lesbian, gay or straight.

Using adjectives as nouns is not good grammar, nor is it good politics. It just muddies the water. Non-lesbians, who lay claim to lesbian descriptors, are the ones obliged to clarify through expanded labeling.

[OS Butch]

Oh, I might add I really like the book" Butch as a Noun" :)

[weatherboi]

transgender (verb) = moving along a gender continuum.


I am not trying to derail the thread but...

Transgender is an adjective, not a verb. People aren't transgendering.

Also, people aren't transgendered even though it is used all the time. i have even caught my self using it early on and still catch myself using transgendered at times. It can be insulting to many people within the transgender community.

It may seem like semantics but it is important.

[Thinker]

For the sake of clarity, and in the the spirit of reclaiming lesbian heritage and grammatical correctness - neoPolitical Correctness be damned (I never signed on for that, anyway):


female/woman (noun) = sex/biology
male/man (noun) = sex/biology

lesbian (noun) = a woman of same sex, sexual orientation

feminine/masculine (adj.) = gender

femme (noun) = female lesbian
butch (noun) = female lesbian who expresses female "masculinity"

transgender (verb) = moving along a gender continuum.

transgender person (noun) = a person of either sex, who may be lesbian, gay or straight.

Using adjectives as nouns is not good grammar, nor is it good politics. It just muddies the water. Non-lesbians, who lay claim to lesbian descriptors, are the ones obliged to clarify through expanded labeling.

I entered this discussion this morning as a moderator because we had a community member ask us to keep an eye on the conversation for fear things might get a little heated. I say that because I want to be clear that I do not identify as a lesbian. Even when that was the community I felt was a "best fit" for me, I was not able to embrace that particular identity. I tried, but I knew it was not an authentic reflection of who I was as a person.

So in coming here to catch up on things this morning, I read the post quoted above and am curious, Chazz, if you pasted this information from somewhere else or if this is how you see things?

Like a few others have stated, some of the information is in conflict with my own definitions. For example, the first two entries... I see male and female as biological sex assignments, but I see woman and man as gender identities.

It seems important to acknowledge that most of us here will have our own little spin on how all these terms and the grammar of it all......as well as the politics.......play out and, hopefully, we won't let those differences be a barrier in reclaiming lesbian pride (as the title suggests).

Thinker (entered as a moderator but posting as a member) :)

[Kobi]

When I started this thread, I hoped it would not turn into a debate of terminology, or who owns what words, or who has the current rights to whatever.

I am a freakin lesbian - one of those relic women who wants to be with women who want to be with other women.

I am tired of feeling invisible in my own community. I am tired of feeling like a guest in my own community.

I just wanted a place to be where others like me can get together and say "hey yea we are still here and we are still ok and we still have a voice and we're not going away."

Is that too much to ask?

[The_Lady_Snow]

Good Morning Kobi, I'm sorry you are feeling some frustration this morning regarding how you are not being seen.. How can we help you not feel this way? What is it you have envisioned for this thread? Are you seeking women with lesbian being their only identifier? How can we help you not feel so alone?

You aren't there's lots of lesbians here I'm sure soon this thread will be full of women embracing their pride right along with you! :)

[Kobi]

Good Morning Kobi, I'm sorry you are feeling some frustration this morning regarding how you are not being seen.. How can we help you not feel this way? What is it you have envisioned for this thread? Are you seeking women with lesbian being their only identifier? How can we help you not feel so alone?

You aren't there's lots of lesbians here I'm sure soon this thread will be full of women embracing their pride right along with you! :)


Thank you for your kindness. My frustration is getting in the way of my being able to answer you at the moment. Let me stew on this a bit.

[tapu]

Lesbian is a weird word. I don't mean the semantics of it, and how we're trying to define or understand it. I mean orthographically. You just don't see the letter l, s, b together in a word much. I remember how, right before and after I came out, my eyes would dart to words like Lebanese and Lisbon in the news or wherever. It's a stand-out letter sequence for me.

When I first started claiming my identity, I said I was gay. I was a gay woman. (I was not, however, a gay, which I think is derogatory, but is becoming more neutral in the plural, e.g., "Gays today want....")

There are still one-off situations where I balk at saying lesbian. Like, to an elderly person. Or too-loudly in a cafe. I don't know whether I don't want to ruin someone's lunch or what, and while I think I should analyze that fear in myself I don't much feel like it right now.

Well, those are my thoughts, and nothing more, about being and calling myself a lesbian. Thanks for a forum where I can explore it.

[ScandalAndy]

I'm a lesbian, and I'm proud of that. I feel I fought hard to earn the right to identify as a lesbian. That being said, I also love transmen and androgynous folks, as well as gender queer beings. I don't think my lesbian identity interferes with that, though. :)

[TickledPink]

I'm a lesbian, and I'm proud of that. I feel I fought hard to earn the right to identify as a lesbian. That being said, I also love transmen and androgynous folks, as well as gender queer beings. I don't think my lesbian identity interferes with that, though. :)

I am curious to know how you fought hard to earn the right to ID as Lesbian?

I know we don't thank those who have actually pioneered our rights nearly enough, those who have gone through riots, hiding who they are, those that have paved the way, so to speak. Those generationed before me. (is that a word :| ) ?

[ScandalAndy]

I am curious to know how you fought hard to earn the right to ID as Lesbian?

I know we don't thank those who have actually pioneered our rights nearly enough, those who have gone through riots, hiding who they are, those that have paved the way, so to speak. Those generationed before me. (is that a word :| ) ?

Oh, I know I owe a LOT to the warriors who came before me and paved the way for all the rights I enjoy today.

I feel I fought for my right to wear the label because of the harassment and abuse I survived from family, friends and peers and my refusal to identify differently even when i was in danger.

That being said, there are many who lost their lives or their light when it was much more dangerous back before stonewall and over the past 50 years. I was lucky.

[Chazz]

I'd object (mildly) to your adj/noun edict on a number of grounds--most notably, that you blur the distinction while making it--but I think this is nicely laid out.

Question: Sex = gender? They were distinguished above, I believe, at one point, but (without doing any research) I think they do equate.

No, sex and gender are not the same things; they do not equate.

SEX refers to biological differences; chromosomes, hormonal profiles, internal and external sex organs.

GENDER describes the characteristics that a society or culture delineates as masculine or feminine. Gender is culturally constructed and varies from culture to culture.

Here's why this matters: An Editorial from The Journal of Applied Physiology

The continuing dedication by physiologists to sex-based and women’s health research comes from the understanding that although females and males share many physiological similarities, they are fundamentally different. This is a basic biological principle in all species in which sexes exist, and there is an obvious need to explore the differentiation that the evolution of sex has afforded humans and their biology, but female and male sex-based research is not the same as gender-based research. The point is that avoiding synonymous use of the terms sex and gender serves to avoid misusing the concepts of sex and gender across disciplines of science. In summary, it is appropriate to use the term sex when referring to the biology of human and animal subjects, and the term gender is reserved for reference to the self-identity and/or social representation of an individual.

Some people many not care about women's health research, but I do personally and professionally. Historically, it has lagged far behind male health research, including in funding. Mixing metaphors, syntax, nouns with verbs, adjectives and neologisms may be "play" for some people, but some of us need to know who we are talking about when we read research data. Objective reality has an essential role for some of us. Me, for one.



Like a few others have stated, some of the information is in conflict with my own definitions. For example, the first two entries... I see male and female as biological sex assignments, but I see woman and man as gender identities.

It seems important to acknowledge that most of us here will have our own little spin on how all these terms and the grammar of it all......as well as the politics.......play out and, hopefully, we won't let those differences be a barrier in reclaiming lesbian pride (as the title suggests).

Woman and man are nouns according to every dictionary I've consulted.

Yep, (some) people within the LGBTQ community have played with definitions, put spin on them, created entirely new vernaculars, neologisms.... This is, I believe, what has led to the current BV controversy. This word play has not served all of us equally well.

They who presume to name, presume to own. All this presuming has led to the disenfranchisement of female identified butches, lesbian women and Feminists in many quarters. It's been incremental, but it's been profound. Just the other night, I went to bed a butch and woke up "masculine of center". :|

So, I'm keeping it simple. I'm sticking to the English dictionary and my HERitage as a lesbian/butch//Feminist. Other people can do what they want, but they cannot force or intimidate me into going along with it.



Chazz,

I think I understand your intent in posting this. However, it could be seen as a supportive thing or a controversial thing or a little bit of both.

I dont want to presume something here. So, could you elaborate a bit on your intent?

I'm good with a little bit of both.

[Kobi]

My wish to rekindle lesbian pride sans the qualifiers is multifold. Part is feeling invisible as a woman and a lesbian. Part is feeling like a guest in my community as a butch. Part is feeling woman and lesbian have somehow become passe and are being phased out in the scheme of things.

My real life world is a world of lesbian women. I dont even know if there is a trans community/group here. I remember as a young woman how invigorated and validated I felt when I found the lesbian and feminist communities. I remember how proud I was to be part of the new trailblazers that would usher in a new era of creativity, development, and activism for women and lesbians. I remember soaking up every bit of information I could get my hands on, attending all the lectures, the events etc. I hadnt felt anything like it before or since.

Lately, I have been looking on the net for "lesbian" web sites or even sites that may be of interest to "lesbians". I wasnt looking for the old stuff. I was looking for the new stuff for the generations that came after us.

It has been a disappointing search thus far. I am finding many women run, lesbian in the title web sites. I was surprised to see a membership of females and males - I expect it in butch-femme but not general sites. I see many stories on beefing up (no pun intended) definitions across a wide spectrum, I see some definate blurring and almost interchangability in gender and orientation, much on relationships, fashion or lack there of, a fair amount on trans, a lot of masculine of center, a lot on variations of femme stuff ( the right words for this escapes me), a bunch on how to get laid (bookmarked those in case anyone is interested).

I didnt see anything on lesbian identity sans qualifiers, little on feminism, little on herstory.

There might be more of what I am looking for on FB but the few times I ventured there it seemed hard to navigate and pretty darn boring.

Even when chatting in real life with youngins today, they can parrot much on womens studies but it seems to be an academic exercise rather than a part of their history or their identities. They take so much for granted that we old farts had to fight for.

They have so much freedom to explore and so many more options/choices than were available back in my day. Yet they seem so unconnected to it.

At 55, I am too tired to be an activist anymore. I cant stay up late enough for the meetings. :jester:

So who's watching the store?

[The_Lady_Snow]

My gender is Femme my assigned sex is Female I can also identify with woman and embrace my occasional masculinity. Physiology reports will never change that for "me" since I don't buy into the binary construct of gender. :)

[ScandalAndy]

I'm one of the ones watching the store. I promise.

The community as a whole is so fractured in the younger generations because identities as a whole have become passe. Nobody wants to use identifiers, they believe in fluidity and rage against a system of names and notations and labels.

I ran a campus LGBT organization for two years and it was the hardest thing I'd ever done in my life. Everyone is so locked in to what THEY support and what they believe that they don't take the time to look and see how we are all still fighting for basic rights and need to support each other. Instead it devolves into a "why should i fight for your cause when MY cause is more important to ME".

I admit, I am one of those who minored in women's studies and can parrot herstory with the best of them, but I'm also trying very hard to learn everything I can from the pioneers. Two of my professors have been fighting most of their lives for tenured positions, and refusing to closet their lesbian identities often at the expense of their job security. One is butch, the other femme, although I doubt she's appreciate being described as such. Those two women taught me more about pride, activism, and the necessity of action than any book ever could.




My wish to rekindle lesbian pride sans the qualifiers is multifold. Part is feeling invisible as a woman and a lesbian. Part is feeling like a guest in my community as a butch. Part is feeling woman and lesbian have somehow become passe and are being phased out in the scheme of things.

My real life world is a world of lesbian women. I dont even know if there is a trans community/group here. I remember as a young woman how invigorated and validated I felt when I found the lesbian and feminist communities. I remember how proud I was to be part of the new trailblazers that would usher in a new era of creativity, development, and activism for women and lesbians. I remember soaking up every bit of information I could get my hands on, attending all the lectures, the events etc. I hadnt felt anything like it before or since.

Lately, I have been looking on the net for "lesbian" web sites or even sites that may be of interest to "lesbians". I wasnt looking for the old stuff. I was looking for the new stuff for the generations that came after us.

It has been a disappointing search thus far. I am finding many women run, lesbian in the title web sites. I was surprised to see a membership of females and males - I expect it in butch-femme but not general sites. I see many stories on beefing up (no pun intended) definitions across a wide spectrum, I see some definate blurring and almost interchangability in gender and orientation, much on relationships, fashion or lack there of, a fair amount on trans, a lot of masculine of center, a lot on variations of femme stuff ( the right words for this escapes me), a bunch on how to get laid (bookmarked those in case anyone is interested).

I didnt see anything on lesbian identity sans qualifiers, little on feminism, little on herstory.

There might be more of what I am looking for on FB but the few times I ventured there it seemed hard to navigate and pretty darn boring.

Even when chatting in real life with youngins today, they can parrot much on womens studies but it seems to be an academic exercise rather than a part of their history or their identities. They take so much for granted that we old farts had to fight for.

They have so much freedom to explore and so many more options/choices than were available back in my day. Yet they seem so unconnected to it.

At 55, I am too tired to be an activist anymore. I cant stay up late enough for the meetings. :jester:

So who's watching the store?

[Softhearted]

It took me a while before using the word lesbian to describe my sexual orientation... usually I was using the word homosexual...

For a while now, I see that the word lesbian is not only a matter of sexual orientation but an identity and it is defined differently depending on the cultural (country of origin) context and is also a question of generation.

I was surprised to read an article in Fugues (a LGBT magazine from Montréal) that many young gay women (in their teens and early 20's) found that the word "lesbienne est vieillot et représente une image de femmes démodées" which means that the word is "old" and represents the image of "outdated" women (not modern, ancient, ect...).
source: http://www.fugues.com/main.cfm?l=fr&p=100_article&article_ID=1251
But when I speak to young hetersexual women and men, for them the word lesbian invokes: a woman who is romantically and physically involved with another woman (which by the way is how I see myself!)

So I suppose I have to use different words when addressing different crowds!

End of my rant

[OS Butch]

I will cross post this to a couple other threads.

Lesbian Connection, aka LC, is a magazine I have superscribed to for years.
It arrives quarterly in my mailbox in an indiscreet manila envelope!
It is a quick read with only 50 pages. They are reprinting the series "Dykes to Watch out For"
The subscription fee is sliding scale free to anyone world wide and $42 for those that can afford it. Donations and gift subscriptions are appreciated!
I am not on the staff, I am just worried that without support, this little rag will vanish as has the woman's bookstores that use to be.

Elsie Publishing
EPI
PO Box 811
East
Lansing, Mi 48826
(517)371-5257 (M-F) noon- 6pm ET
elsiepub@aol.com

www.LConline.org

[ScandalAndy]

I will cross post this to a couple other threads.

Lesbian Connection, aka LC, is a magazine I have superscribed to for years.
It arrives quarterly in my mailbox in an indiscreet manila envelope!
It is a quick read with only 50 pages. They are reprinting the series "Dykes to Watch out For"
The subscription fee is sliding scale free to anyone world wide and $42 for those that can afford it. Donations and gift subscriptions are appreciated!
I am not on the staff, I am just worried that without support, this little rag will vanish as has the woman's bookstores that use to be.

Elsie Publishing
EPI
PO Box 811
East
Lansing, Mi 48826
(517)371-5257 (M-F) noon- 6pm ET
elsiepub@aol.com

www.LConline.org



THANK YOU!!! :) This is a great link. :)

[ScandalAndy]

I don't know if it is appropriate to post this here, but just in case it is, I will do my best to do a good job representing.


I am on a very small staff of individuals who write for a lesbian blog. it started off as a "A light-hearted lesbian and women's issues blog and community geared toward twenty-somethings" but since then we've grown to include an audience of all ages. I mostly write angry feminist articles, but the girls have been champs posting coming out stories and the like. I think it's worth the read for entertainment, and sometimes it can even make you think a little.

At the moment we are trying to raise money to give to the "Because I Am A Girl" project through Plan International, which goes to help rebuild the lives of girls rescued from the sex trafficking industry in India. I think it's one of our more noble undertakings.

The blog is here: ToughxCookies (http://www.toughxcookies.com) and here (http://www.toughxcookies.com/p/causes.html) is the link to our "Causes" page.


I hope that these links will help show how the younger generation handles lesbian pride, and maybe give a bit of insight into how very differently we all view the world around us.


If this isn't the right place to post this, I would appreciate any guidance about where I should move this to. Thanks!

[*Anya*]

I don't know if it is appropriate to post this here, but just in case it is, I will do my best to do a good job representing.
I am on a very small staff of individuals who write for a lesbian blog. it started off as a "A light-hearted lesbian and women's issues blog and community geared toward twenty-somethings" but since then we've grown to include an audience of all ages. I mostly write angry feminist articles, but the girls have been champs posting coming out stories and the like. I think it's worth the read for entertainment, and sometimes it can even make you think a little.
At the moment we are trying to raise money to give to the "Because I Am A Girl" project through Plan International, which goes to help rebuild the lives of girls rescued from the sex trafficking industry in India. I think it's one of our more noble undertakings.
The blog is here: ToughxCookies (http://www.toughxcookies.com) and here (http://www.toughxcookies.com/p/causes.html) is the link to our "Causes" page.
I hope that these links will help show how the younger generation handles lesbian pride, and maybe give a bit of insight into how very differently we all view the world around us.
If this isn't the right place to post this, I would appreciate any guidance about where I should move this to. Thanks!
****************
Andy, if "Reclaiming Lesbian Pride" is not the right place for your post-I honestly don't know where it would be! Absolutely worthy undertaking! Our young femmes and butches are exactly the right place to ensure the survival of our Lesbian Communities.

I will check it out and thank you!

Anya

[Lynn]

I've come to recognize that my online and earthly worlds do not coincide very often. Individuals and their identities are much more complex than their labels. It doesn't matter if I agree with someone's definitions, as long as they don't impose their views on me.

I'm a lesbian. That is my chief identity as far as describing who attracts me, who I love, and how I view the world. Of course, I have other identities, but they are definitely influenced by my self-view as a lesbian. For me, there is a historical and political perspective that is the context for who I am as a partner, a mother, and a worker. Coming to the point of self-understanding, self-acceptance, and a level of comfort has truly been a challenge. I won't play "your challenges have been greater than mine" game. My challenges have been representative of both the women's community at large, and what the community faced through the 70's and forward, as well as of my own struggles with family and personally. All are valid, and all have paved the way for the triumphs and challenges faced by the next generation.

When I first discovered a butch-femme online community, I was told that I was "a lesbian" not "a femme" so I didn't really belong. I do belong. I am a woman who loves butch women. I don't consider it a label, I consider it a description. Women in my community hate the idea of butch or femme, equating it with role playing or something put on. They don't understand that there is a range of self-expression just as there is a range of personal preferences. As a more feminine woman, I have been told I'm not someone's type more than once. If they can have preferences, so can I.

[msW8ing]

Ok the company I work for is zero tolerence for any kind of harrassment/bashing. It's a huge company with literally thousands of employees across the nation. Very diverse to say the least. So some co-workers (family) and I were having lunch. It just seems that family naturally gravitates to me which is wonderful for me. Anyhow, one of the young uns can't be more than 21 looks at me and asked just so matter of factly..And how do you identify? I'm sure I had that confuzzled look:blink: I returned the question to her..although she was boi-ish looking I was curious..with Kobi's thread in mind..she stalled for a second and proudly stated she was andro. I said ok..she asked again how I ID. I said I'm a lesbian. She chuckled and said she figured that much out but what kind. I said female lesbian. She looked to be confuzzled..the older lesbians sitting at the table were giggling because they "got" it..the young un still confuzzled. I asked patiently..do you know what a lesbian is? The young un said well yes..it's a woman who likes women. I said yes thats part of the definition. Then one of the older lesbians jumped upon her soap box and went into a 15 minute lecture of what a lesbian truly is (in her opinion)..the poor young un seemed even more confused. I asked her if she had any questions..she said still looking :blink: Umm no not right now. I said well feel free to ask all you need to but know that each lesbian/gay/queer you ask that question to you are most likely to get a different answer. Shaking her head she mumbled something about having so much to learn..I smiled patted her hand and said yep and I'm more than double your age and am still learning each day. Just thought I'd share this little story. Kind of an insight to how one young un thinks.

[NJFemmie]

I've never been one to get involved in the politics of it all. I never used to "identify" myself until I started to get more involved online. As far as identifying, I never used to feel I had to. I find that when you become more involved in specifically identifying yourself and who you are, the more you seem to have to defend it - and I have never felt a need to explain myself. I am who I am, and that person changes every day in various ways ... yet, one aspect of the many things I am is a woman who loves a woman. And with that, you can call it whatever you want. I call it my bliss.

:)

[Kobi]

Sometimes I wonder if all the words we use to define our identities are a necessity or just a marketing strategy gone wonkie.

It might be kind of cool to have a job as an "identity consultant" or an "identity strategist" or maybe an "identity reconfiguration specialist". :blink:

I was kidding but now that I think about, there may be some possibilities here.

[*Anya*]

I have lived through many twists and turns in my life to accept my sexual orientation. Women, in all shapes and sizes turn me on.

Femmes turn on the nuturing, connecting, sharing, laughing, common bonds, sisterhood; part of me. I can easily chat with lesbian femmes and feel totally comfortable with them.

Femme is my gender identity.

I am sexually attracted to female, lesbian butches. They just do it for me. When I see or meet a butch lesbian and all that ability I have with my femme lesbian sisters, goes right out the window. My heart begins to pound, my stomach goes into knots, my mind goes blank and I am as though I have been struck as mute. I am sure I have blown it many times by appearing as though I am an idiot. The sexual charge for me is so great, it overpowers my ability to think, talk or flirt.

How am I with bio men? Just like with my femme sisters as far as ease and comfort. Why? They hold zero sexual attraction for me.

I am a lesbian femme.

[msW8ing]

Sometimes I wonder if all the words we use to define our identities are a necessity or just a marketing strategy gone wonkie.

It might be kind of cool to have a job as an "identity consultant" or an "identity strategist" or maybe an "identity reconfiguration specialist". :blink:

I was kidding but now that I think about, there may be some possibilities here.



Put your office nextdoor to my bakery. :chef::glasses:

[Kobi]

Put your office nextdoor to my bakery. :chef::glasses:

Can I put my office inside the bakery? And do you plan on making those twisted cruellers at your bakery? I miss those.

[msW8ing]

Can I put my office inside the bakery? And do you plan on making those twisted cruellers at your bakery? I miss those.

For you, I would bake anything your heart desires. And yes you can put your office inside the bakery

[msW8ing]

http://i1142.photobucket.com/albums/n620/Wendy_Sampson/45984_124856154229127_100001142287276_132353_49912 1_n_large.jpg

[Chazz]

When I started this thread, I hoped it would not turn into a debate of terminology, or who owns what words, or who has the current rights to whatever.

I hear you. I hate, hate, hate the political mechanics, too.

But some of us, not necessarily all of us, recognize the backward motion that is taking place in the community which HAS RESULTED IN A LOSS OF OUR LESBIAN PRIDE and HERITAGE.

But, I get it. This parsing of terms is a drag. Is it ever ! ! ! ! However, one must go where the problem lies; at least part of the problem.

Reassigning meaning to words lesbians identify with effects and changes how we imagine ourselves. Language matters. There are those within the community who know this and have been studiously chip, chip, chipping away at language while the rest of us have been building a tent.

When 1 + 1 stops equaling 2, and 1 + 2 starts equaling 4, we're not communicating. And when someone says: Hey, we're not communicating, and another person says: Hush up, you're wrecking the tent, kumbaya. That's anti-communication - i.e. a subtle form of censorship. I don't know how to reclaim pride, build a tent and listen to the death knells of my identifiers all at once. I can cede space; I will not cede my identity.

But, I get it. The mechanics of communication are boring, even anxiety provoking. It's so much easier to say: "Let's get along, shall we?", as we sidestep certain things. Let's not, then, do a Chicken Little when we finally notice that the meaning of lesbianism/Womanism/Feminism is fadding into obscurity. Otherwise, what's the need for Reclaiming Lesbian Pride?

Kobi, you and I are on the same page about most things. Where we may diverge is about how to reclaim lesbian pride while walking around a linguistic elephant in the room, in a thread about reclaiming pride. There is clutter underfoot - fractured words, recalcitrant nouns, spurious adjectives.... I don't know how to have this conversation, balanced on one toe, while meaning is drained from the very words we use to define ourselves, even as we speak.

I am a freakin lesbian - one of those relic women who wants to be with women who want to be with other women.

I am tired of feeling invisible in my own community. I am tired of feeling like a guest in my own community.

I just wanted a place to be where others like me can get together and say "hey yea we are still here and we are still ok and we still have a voice and we're not going away."

Is that too much to ask?


NO, it isn't too much to ask.

But, I do have a question.... Who's "voice" are we speaking in? Ours, or those who do not ID as lesbian women?

If your post was directed at those who would recalculate our language for us, kumbaya. I got your back.

[tapu]

<perk>

did someone call for a linguist?


(yeh, yeh, I know, it's not the kind of input you want.)

[tapu]

Eh, I got up my nerve to provide this linguistic perspective on things. I realize that pronouns are not the immediate issue, but it may point a path toward a different way of looking at identifiers. Namely, pinpointing exactly what it is we want to identify.

Imposing change on language is not usually a very successful endeavor--and yet has potential for creating societal conflicts out of proportion to the desired effects. George Orwell created an example that showed us some of the myriad problems that can result.

There is, however, a natural language shift in English right now to neutralize gender in singular 3rd person pronouns. This is the use, in the vernacular, of they, them, to signify the singular as well as the plural. These forms are making their way into casual writing already. This is a trend that is not likely to desist.

I propose that the use of they/them accomplishes more political equalization than adding invented sets of pronouns to the paradigm. Example: use hy/hys/hym and we presume we know both your sex and your gender. Whereas, they is neutral. Just as the first and second person pronouns do not distinguish, neither would the third person then.

This kind of balancing shift in a paradigm makes it likely to "take hold." It is just a matter of time.


Actually, if I should move this somewhere where it's more applicable, please let me know where that is.

[Kobi]

I hear you. I hate, hate, hate the political mechanics, too.

But some of us, not necessarily all of us, recognize the backward motion that is taking place in the community which HAS RESULTED IN A LOSS OF OUR LESBIAN PRIDE and HERITAGE.

But, I get it. This parsing of terms is a drag. Is it ever ! ! ! ! However, one must go where the problem lies; at least part of the problem.

Reassigning meaning to words lesbians identify with effects and changes how we imagine ourselves. Language matters. There are those within the community who know this and have been studiously chip, chip, chipping away at language while the rest of us have been building a tent.

When 1 + 1 stops equaling 2, and 1 + 2 starts equaling 4, we're not communicating. And when someone says: Hey, we're not communicating, and another person says: Hush up, you're wrecking the tent, kumbaya. That's anti-communication - i.e. a subtle form of censorship. I don't know how to reclaim pride, build a tent and listen to the death knells of my identifiers all at once. I can cede space; I will not cede my identity.

But, I get it. The mechanics of communication are boring, even anxiety provoking. It's so much easier to say: "Let's get along, shall we?", as we sidestep certain things. Let's not, then, do a Chicken Little when we finally notice that the meaning of lesbianism/Womanism/Feminism is fadding into obscurity. Otherwise, what's the need for Reclaiming Lesbian Pride?

Kobi, you and I are on the same page about most things. Where we may diverge is about how to reclaim lesbian pride while walking around a linguistic elephant in the room, in a thread about reclaiming pride. There is clutter underfoot - fractured words, recalcitrant nouns, spurious adjectives.... I don't know how to have this conversation, balanced on one toe, while meaning is drained from the very words we use to define ourselves, even as we speak.



NO, it isn't too much to ask.

But, I do have a question.... Who's "voice" are we speaking in? Ours, or those who do not ID as lesbian women?

If your post was directed at those who would recalculate our language for us, kumbaya. I got your back.


Chazz,

We think so much alike. It feels good to be on the same page as someone else.

The voice I am speaking with is the woman, lesbian, feminist voice. It is who I am and what I represent in this world.

Reclaiming lesbian pride, to me, is about being willing to stand up and be counted as a woman, as a woman who loves other women, as a woman who partners with other women, and as a woman for whom feminism and lesbianism, the unabridged version, is their guide.

Reclaiming lesbian pride, to me, is about not being willing to compromise the language of your heritage or its unique meaning. It is about claiming it, owning it, speaking up for it, defending it, and taking back the power and control surrounding it.

I would love this thread to be about those things. It would disappoint me if it turned into a debate about linguistics per se. This, to me, is not about linguistics. It is about what is behind the language and that, to me, is the crux of the matter.

Is kumbaya yes?

[*Anya*]

Chazz,

We think so much alike. It feels good to be on the same page as someone else.

The voice I am speaking with is the woman, lesbian, feminist voice. It is who I am and what I represent in this world.

Reclaiming lesbian pride, to me, is about being willing to stand up and be counted as a woman, as a woman who loves other women, as a woman who partners with other women, and as a woman for whom feminism and lesbianism, the unabridged version, is their guide.

Reclaiming lesbian pride, to me, is about not being willing to compromise the language of your heritage or its unique meaning. It is about claiming it,
owning it, speaking up for it, defending it, and taking back the power and control surrounding it.

I would love this thread to be about those things. It would disappoint me if it turned into a debate about linguistics per se. This, to me, is not about linguistics. It is about what is behind the language and that, to me, is the crux of the matter.

Is kumbaya yes?



For me, yes, it is Kumbaya!

Very simply: Lesbian pride for me is to stand up everywhere I need to and say, "Yes, I am a woman-identified, woman-loving, feminist lesbian. No equivocating, no minimizing, no qualifying".

I have gone to hell and back to get to this place in my life. I am proud to have survived this journey. Many times I did not feel I would survive it.

My family cast me out and for 15 years none of them would speak to me because I stood up and proudly stated:

"I am a lesbian. I will always fall in love with, make love with, live my intimate life with other lesbian women".

(Maybe one qualifier: I will always fall in love & make love with butch lesbian women).

[The_Lady_Snow]

I have a question.... Where do lesbians who date all over the gender map go? What if one is a lesbian that's open to dating anyone in the queer spectrum? What happens to lesbians who've been with men? Sometimes Kobi I would of loved to claim lesbian but was told no, you're kinky, have kids with a man, to much make up, yada yada. So I claimed dyke, where can other lesbians that don't fit your view of lesbian go? Where do they go to claim their pride? :) (f)

[Martina]

i am too tired to make sense. But i will try.

Whenever someone talks about defending an identity, they are in deep water. Basically, it's a battle already lost (to mix my metaphors).

Think of people in France who are fighting for a French identity that does not include women wearing the niqab. Or again the French trying to protect the purity of their language and culture. Did that work? No. It never works.

Problems with that mode of discourse:

1) You are framing it as a conflict rather than a change or evolution. You are creating two sides when there may be many or none.

2) It tends to have an agenda that is in part reactionary. France's is an anti-immigrant racism lurking behind that pride in French culture. Here? Who knows? Probably some transphobia.

3) It never works.

i am proud to be a lesbian, but my version of lesbian, which is pretty mainstream for my age-group (yes, i listened to Meg Christian), wasn't everybody's then, and it's not many people's now. You can't have an official version of an identity. And an effect of defending and reclaiming IS expressing some typical or baseline set of traits that one is defending. YAY for Berkies may mean Manolos are not the footwear of the lesbian elite. I's dangerous. i have seen that with "femme." It's going on with "butch" all over.

We can't look at it as reclaiming and defending without becoming reactionary. It's inevitable.

My suggestion is that we show up as we are and love ourselves. If it's a political setting with a specific goal, then politicize the debate. But be careful about how we define ourselves.

There are lesbians here who aren't "women loving women." They are living with and loving men. They are lesbians. I myself feel liberated by that. It means there is more room for me to breathe. It means i have new sisters and brothers.

[Julie]

I celebrate my Lesbian Pride and my Lesbian Heritage.
There is, nor was there ever anything for me to reclaim.
I never gave it UP!

Even when The Lesbians called me a traitor for marrying my best friend who happened to be a gay man and attempted to throw me out of the "Club."

It is quite simple for me... As a Lesbian who LOVES Masculine Butches and only dates Masculine Butches -- I am a Lesbian.

If I were to get in an accident tomorrow and unable to move my body or feel sensation - Never again to be touched or touch another. Or if I were to choose to never date again.

I would still be a Lesbian!

Who you fuck - Who you play with - Who you date - Who you associate with...

Has nothing to do with personal identity.

I am Julie
I am a Lesbian
I am a Femme
I am a Woman
I am a Mother
I am a Daughter
I am a Partner
I am a Friend

None of the above descriptors can ever be taken away -- And again... For me.
Nothing to reclaim.
I came out in 1979 as a Lesbian and I will die a Lesbian!

In all honesty, I am sick and tired of people placing constraints on ones identity. You can't be a lesbian - your hair is too long. You can't be a lesbian, you have long nails. You can't be a lesbian, you dress like a man. You can't be a lesbian, you are out of a 50's housewife movie.

Who says?

Julie

[*Anya*]

i am too tired to make sense. But i will try.

Whenever someone talks about defending an identity, they are in deep water. Basically, it's a battle already lost (to mix my metaphors).

Think of people in France who are fighting for a French identity that does not include women wearing the niqab. Or again the French trying to protect the purity of their language and culture. Did that work? No. It never works.

Problems with that mode of discourse:

1) You are framing it as a conflict rather than a change or evolution. You are creating two sides when there may be many or none.
2) It tends to have an agenda that is in part reactionary. France's is an anti-immigrant racism lurking behind that pride in French culture. Here? Who knows? Probably some transphobia.
3) It never works.
We can't look at it as reclaiming and defending without becoming reactionary. It's inevitable.

My suggestion is that we show up as we are and love ourselves. If it's a political setting with a specific goal, then politicize the debate. But be careful about how we define ourselves.

There are lesbians here who aren't "women loving women." They are living with and loving men. They are lesbians. I myself feel liberated by that. It means there is more room for me to breathe. It means i have new sisters and brothers.

I do not mean this in a hostile, angry manner but truly do not understand the definition of a lesbian if one is in a love, sexual relationship with a man.

I am also of the Meg generation and have no problem admitting that. I guess we all can have a different definition of the same word but I would not have been disowned by my family if I had brought home a man. My parents screamed lesbian at me as though it were a filthy, ugly word and they seemed to know what a lesbian was.

Re: children. I married at 18 and 2 babies by the time I was 21. I could not admit to myself I was gay until my mid-20's. Many women come out in later life and live with women the rest of their days.

The whole trans issue confuses me. The new gender spectrum confuses me. It was not a part of my world until the planet. I may not understand it but I would defend to the end anyone's right to live their life their way. Not understanding is not the same as transphobia! The only phobia I have in my life is claustrophobia.

My definition of lesbian is as I see it for myself as I posted it and I believe that I have the the right to call it as I see it for myself in a specifically lesbian thread, or don't I? Did that change too?

I have stated before and will again: I always do my best to make "I" statements when I post.

[Julie]

I do not mean this in a hostile, angry manner but truly do not understand the definition of a lesbian if one is in a love, sexual relationship with a man.

I am also of the Meg generation and have no problem admitting that. I guess we all can have a different definition of the same word but I would not have been disowned by my family if I had brought home a man. My parents screamed lesbian at me as though it were a filthy, ugly word and they seemed to know what a lesbian was.

Yet here you are claiming to know - what a Lesbian is!

Re: children. I married at 18 and 2 babies by the time I was 21. I could not admit to myself I was gay until my mid-20's. Many women come out in later life and live with women the rest of their days.

Some would say even today (lesbian community) You are simply Bi-Sexual. How do you feel about that?


The whole trans issue confuses me. The new gender spectrum confuses me. It was not a part of my world until the planet. I may not understand it but I would defend to the end anyone's right to live their life their way.

My way, my definition of lesbian is as I posted it and believe I do gave the right to call it as I see it for myself.

And that is the beauty of being a Lesbian. Nobody can take this away from you. Not now and not ever.



One cannot possibly help who one falls in love with. It is a chemical and spiritual reaction. Your soul is touched on levels which are almost incomprehensible.

I know you do not understand the trans issue... I remember once upon a time, not understanding it either. Though, I was much younger than I am now. I am glad you are here now at the Planet and are learning about our very diverse queer community here.

I have never dated a male identified butch. I have always dated Female Identified Butches. I cannot possibly honestly say, that I would not (if my circumstances were different). And if I did, I would be devastated to learn, that my community shunned me. It would not change the fact, that I am a Lesbian loving a M/I butch.

Julie

[tapu]

Problems with that mode of discourse:

1) You are framing it as a conflict rather than a change or evolution. You are creating two sides when there may be many or none.

2) It tends to have an agenda that is in part reactionary. France's is an anti-immigrant racism lurking behind that pride in French culture. Here? Who knows? Probably some transphobia.

3) It never works.




Your analysis here bears directly on the issues raised by the shifting pronoun paradigm, too.

[tapu]

I do not mean this in a hostile, angry manner but truly do not understand the definition of a lesbian if one is in a love, sexual relationship with a man.
.


I don't get this either. We seem to be rendering the word lesbian meaningless.

[Julie]

I don't get this either. We seem to be rendering the word lesbian meaningless.

Do you mean... You and Anya?

I am so sorry you find our history to be so meaningless.

[tapu]

Do you mean... You and Anya?

I am so sorry you find our history to be so meaningless.


No, sorry, I meant that I "truly do not understand the definition of a lesbian if one is in a love, sexual relationship with a man." (from the part of Anya's post that I quoted)

If a woman is in a loving and sexual relationship with a man, then in what sense is she a lesbian?

[DapperButch]

I don't get this either. We seem to be rendering the word lesbian meaningless.

I think it is about whether one defining is lesbian as a cultural orientation, rather than just a sexual orientation.

The women that I have known who have dated men who defined as lesbians, dated women exclusively at one point (which was also the point when they first took on the identity of lesbian). It became their identity on many levels and they still identify with those many other levels even if they are currently dating a man.

In this community is it not completely unusual.

Hope this helps, tapu.

[Julie]

No, sorry, I meant that I "truly do not understand the definition of a lesbian if one is in a love, sexual relationship with a man." (from the part of Anya's post that I quoted)

If a woman is in a loving and sexual relationship with a man, then in what sense is she a lesbian?

It is the core of her being. Her soul, Tapu.
One cannot argue with the soul of another human being.

Being a Lesbian is not sexual. That's what the right wing says. I hope people in our community are not saying or implying the same thing.

If you were never able to be touched or touch another female bodied person again, in an intimate manner - Would you stop being a lesbian?

If you were never to love another woman again - Would you stop being a lesbian?

[tapu]

But isn't that the meaning of bisexual?

[BullDog]

The possibilities are endless. I claim lesbian and dyke in addition to being a butch woman. I have dated femmes that were lesbians. However I have also dated femmes who did not claim lesbian (they claimed bisexual, queer or gay). Also some of the femmes I have dated have also dated men, FTMs, male identified butches, etc- some were lesbians, some weren't. The women I have dated have or had their own identities before dating me and continue to do so. The fact that they are dating a butch lesbian doesn't change their identity.

So you can also have a woman to woman relationship where one or both women are not lesbians.

[tapu]

It is the core of her being. Her soul, Tapu.
One cannot argue with the soul of another human being.

Being a Lesbian is not sexual. That's what the right wing says. I hope people in our community are not saying or implying the same thing.

If you were never able to be touched or touch another female bodied person again, in an intimate manner - Would you stop being a lesbian?

If you were never to love another woman again - Would you stop being a lesbian?

No, I would have to fall in love with a man as a partner and enjoy the sex with him. Then, I would not be a lesbian. I would be, historically at least, bisexual.

[Julie]

No, I would have to fall in love with a man as a partner and enjoy the sex with him. Then, I would not be a lesbian. I would be, historically at least, bisexual.

Okay, I understand!

Being a Lesbian is sexual in nature for you.
For many, it is not sexual in nature.

But, I respect your personal sexual identity.

[tapu]

By lesbian, I mean a woman who is (now) biologically a female, who is attracted to other women who are (now) biologically female.

I reject the assertion that this is a right-wing definition.

There are other words to describe the other specific sexual orientations you describe. If I fit that first one, I'm a lesbian, like it or not.

Someone above stated, "Words have meanings." And that's good or we would be rattling around the fabled Tower of Babel.

[tapu]

I'm confused. How can you be concerned with our history, and yet claim that lesbian is not sexual in nature? What do you think it ever meant? From what descriptive need did it arise?


Sorry--meant to quote julie's last post on this.

[The_Lady_Snow]

No, I would have to fall in love with a man as a partner and enjoy the sex with him. Then, I would not be a lesbian. I would be, historically at least, bisexual.


In 1925 lesbian was used by medical literature to indicate sodomite. Sometimes language evolves, your a linguist yes? I would think you would see this in your line of work, I'm not highly educated and know that words have meaning to us differently. The root of it belongs to woman, I'm not denying that yet with time and more freedom to be out it's evolved and meanings are different to each individual with the root of it being WOMAN. In this online venue we have many lesbians who have partnered with men or are with men that does not make them less than as lesbians it's who they are.

[Julie]

I'm confused. How can you be concerned with our history, and yet claim that lesbian is not sexual in nature? What do you think it ever meant? From what descriptive need did it arise?

I am not concerned about our history.
I am concerned with people (such as yourself) deciding who it is appropriate to use the term and identify as a Lesbian and who it is not appropriate for.

That concerns me.

For me... For me...
Lesbian is who I am inside.
It is part of my soul.
It is not about who I am having sex with.
It never was.

My memories of loving girls goes back to when I was a child. I remember this heavy feeling in my soul, when she would look at me. How I would lose my breath. How all I could do was think of her. Watch her on the swings and know... Just know, I would LOVE her forever. Before, I even knew what sex was.

It's simple really.

[tapu]

In 1925 lesbian was used by medical literature to indicate sodomite. Sometimes language evolves, your a linguist yes? I would think you would see this in your line of work, I'm not highly educated and know that words have meaning to us differently. The root of it belongs to woman, I'm not denying that yet with time and more freedom to be out it's evolved and meanings are different to each individual with the root of it being WOMAN. In this online venue we have many lesbians who have partnered with men or are with men that does not make them less than as lesbians it's who they are.


You're right and I meant in more current use. Like, when we walk away from this thread, the word will mean, to the very, very vast majority of native speakers what I defined it as above. We can go on about wanting to change the meaning, but that's not how language changes, as Martina laid out. Besides, why do that?? I may be on a level far less philosophical than everyone else, but for me there has to be some logical, real-world application.

I sense a general anger directed at me. Please know that I am reading and respecting your objective points.

[Kobi]

I said I would be disappointed if this deteriorated into a discussion of linguistics rather than what is behind the words. Consider me disappointed.

Who we fuck, who we play with, who we date has nothing to do with personal identity? You know that isnt even logical right?

Yes Anya, you do have the right to speak for your identity as you define it. And no one is call you a bisexual for having once been married and having kids via (shock) a penis.

It is not about linguistics or even identities. It is about what is behind those.

And obviously, a discussion of that is too threatening to some people.

[The_Lady_Snow]

You're right and I meant in more current use. Like, when we walk away from this thread, the word will mean, to the very, very vast majority of native speakers what I defined it as above. We can go on about wanting to change the meaning, but that's not how language changes, as Martina laid out. Besides, why do that?? I may be on a level far less philosophical than everyone else, but for me there has to be some logical, real-world application.

I sense a general anger directed at me. Please know that I am reading and respecting your objective points.


*I* for one am not angry at *you* Tapu. I really wanted to know where other lesbians who don't fit into this particular meaning fit? I mean sometimes in reality one can't be a lesbian from the start and one marries, or dates men only because they were afraid? Or maybe one wants to claim lesbian but they are told no you can't you are dating Femme's. I was curious. :)

[The_Lady_Snow]

I said I would be disappointed if this deteriorated into a discussion of linguistics rather than what is behind the words. Consider me disappointed.

Wo we fuck, who we play with, who we date has nothing to do with personal identity? You know that isnt even logical right?

Yes Anya, you do have the right to speak for your identity as you define it. And no one is call you a bisexual for having once been married and having kids via (shock) a penis.

It is not about linguistics or even identities. It is about what is behind those.

And obviously, a discussion of that is too threatening to some people.
















Kobi can you expand what this means? What is threatening? I'm confused. Thanks in advance :) (f)

[tapu]

I am not concerned about our history.
I am concerned with people (such as yourself) deciding who it is appropriate to use the term and identify as a Lesbian and who it is not appropriate for.

That concerns me.

For me... For me...
Lesbian is who I am inside.
It is part of my soul.
It is not about who I am having sex with.
It never was.

My memories of loving girls goes back to when I was a child. I remember this heavy feeling in my soul, when she would look at me. How I would lose my breath. How all I could do was think of her. Watch her on the swings and know... Just know, I would LOVE her forever. Before, I even knew what sex was.

It's simple really.

Nothing you're describing above is contradictory to being a lesbian, but as for the minimal semantic value of the word, it comes down to:

You have a pussy? You like pussy exclusively? You are a lesbian.

[Martina]

There have always been lesbians who fucked men. Always.

How many people are on the extremes of the Kinsey scale? And of those, i am sure a lower percent are women. In any case, one thing you can say about humans is that they will always do shit they are not "supposed" to do where lust and love are concerned.

The ID does not lose its meaning because there are members of the identity group who are not typical. Typical is rare, in fact.

We are not talking about language. We are talking about human behavior. If you want to get into a philosophical argument about it, almost any identity label is impossible to define (and shouldn't be defined narrowly or at all for political reasons.) There are great discussions about what African-American or Black means. There are absolutely no cultural commonalities that all members of that group share except being victimized by racism in the particular form it takes in the U.S. And it has long been acknowledged that race is not a genetically meaningful category.

You can't say lesbians are this because they do that. THey don't. They never have and they never will. Because we're human.

Hooray for being human. Hooray for defying expectations. Hooray for fucking and loving who we want.

And again, trying to define an identity is always questionable. In my opinion, there is always an agenda. To do the work we do politically, to be who we are, to find each other, to love and live, we don't NEED to define ourselves. We need to BE WHO WE ARE. We can describe ourselves in all our variety. But to narrowly define who we are is meaningless. It inevitably excludes. And that's usually where the agenda comes in. Someone WANTS to exclude someone else.

i hate to be condescending, but there are shelves of books written about how complex these issues are. Some of them by linguists.

[Julie]

Nothing you're describing above is contradictory to being a lesbian, but as for the minimal semantic value of the word, it comes down to:

You have a pussy? You like pussy exclusively? You are a lesbian.

What if I do not eat pussy?
What about the Stone Femme's who never touch their partner?
Are they not lesbians?

[The_Lady_Snow]

Nothing you're describing above is contradictory to being a lesbian, but as for the minimal semantic value of the word, it comes down to:

You have a pussy? You like pussy exclusively? You are a lesbian.

Sometimes Tapu there are lesbians and dykes who really really like any kind of vulva. Sometimes some lesbians like them some boy/boi cunt. :sunglass:

[Kobi]

When I started this thread, I hoped it would not turn into a debate of terminology, or who owns what words, or who has the current rights to whatever.

I am a freakin lesbian - one of those relic women who wants to be with women who want to be with other women.

I am tired of feeling invisible in my own community. I am tired of feeling like a guest in my own community.

I just wanted a place to be where others like me can get together and say "hey yea we are still here and we are still ok and we still have a voice and we're not going away."

Is that too much to ask?






I asked if it was too much to ask. From the deterioration of this thread, it is pretty clear it is too much to ask.

As it is just a matter of time before the rest of the "crew" is summoned to feed into what some want this to be rather than what the intent was, I wish you all a pleasant evening. :)

[Medusa]

Folks -

There have been some ugly posts in this thread that are entirely too personal and shitty. If you cannot have this discussion in a calm, civil manner without trying to jab one another, then kindly bow out and let the discussion continue.

Thanks,
Angie

[BullDog]

Kobi I really don't know why you are so disappointed and I guess I am not clear on what your intent of the thread is.

I personally am a lesbian that takes pride in how multi-faceted the identity lesbian is and welcome the discussion of it in all its many aspects.

[Heart]

Martina - I love your posts here.

Lesbian is as much a culturally/politically/socially bound term and identity as it is a sexual orientation.

You know.... I knew that this thread ran the risk of turning into policing of the term lesbian...

If the thread is also a reaction to recent BV conflicts, I notice that the butch women who split from BV stated that their primary concerns were transparency, and the fact that BV no longer had a strongly articulated feminist, anti-misogynist, anti-agist message. I think that's important, because they are focusing on issues, not identities. That's what solidarity is really about.

But back to lesbian pride: If you express pride in being a lesbian and/or honor that history/experience, I don't need to take an inventory of who you've slept with or even what your genitals look like to stand with you under the banner of lesbian pride.

Heart

[The_Lady_Snow]

I asked if it was too much to ask. From the deterioration of this thread, it is pretty clear it is too much to ask.

As it is just a matter of time before the rest of the "crew" is summoned to feed into what some want this to be rather than what the intent was, I wish you all a pleasant evening. :)



The above feels really icky to me Kobi, it feels like you are saying people are gonna come in like its a feeding frenzy of some kind. I honestly don't think that will happen since lesbian terminology is different for a lot of people here in this venue.. :)

[JustJo]

But back to lesbian pride: If you express pride in being a lesbian and/or honor that history/experience, I don't need to take an inventory of who you've slept with or even what your genitals look like to stand with you under the banner of lesbian pride.

Heart

Yes, this....thank you Heart.

I know I've said this here and there in various threads....but I truly, deeply wish that we could all just define ourselves and let everyone else do the same.

I don't need to understand how Julie or Snow or Kobi or Bulldog or Dapper or anyone else here defines themselves in order to respect them and their own definition.

If I choose to call myself lesbian or queer or dyke or femme or bisexual...then I am. I happen to know someone who defined herself as a lesbian for years, even though she was a virgin who had had no intimate relationships with anyone. Is she a lesbian to me? Yes, because she claims it.

I agree that language carries weight and has meaning...but I think we use it too often to fracture and splinter and poke and prod.

:olive:

[Heart]

If I choose to call myself lesbian or queer or dyke or femme or bisexual...then I am.

Yes, language is important -- which is why I chose the words I did: I will stand with anyone under the banner of lesbian pride -- because pride is about community, as well as individuals, and for me pride doesn't have to be about sameness.

But... I am not ready to agree that anyone is whatever they wish to call themselves. I've thought about this over time... I don't control what others say they are, and I don't police it, but that doesn't mean I see whatever they tell me to see. Someone who has no claim to any Native American Tribe, but decides that they want to call themselves Native American is not identifying, they are appropriating.

Heart

[BullDog]

Thanks to Martina, Julie, Dapper, Heart and others for pointing out that lesbian is as much a cultural, social, spiritual and political orientation and identity as it is sexual orientation.

Lesbian is my sexual orientation. I am also a stone butch and there is zero conflict for me in being a stone butch and lesbian. Lesbian is also very much a part of the social and cultural world that I came of age in. I knew I liked girls from the age of five if not younger. Growing up I heard the terms gay and lesbian. I did not know about queer or terms like female identified butch until I came online- neither one of those terms have much personal meaning to me. They are not a part of my history or culture. However for others those terms do resonate with them on a personal level.

I moved to Santa Cruz, California when I was in my early twenties- which is like Lesbianville, USA (one of them) and was totally immersed in lesbian culture and feminism. Lesbian is very much about my personal history, culture and politics as much as who I am attracted to. Not everyone has that same history or connection that I do. Others have a different connection with the word lesbian. Some may have a more narrower interpretation of what lesbian means than I do. That's ok as long as you don't impose your own personal meaning onto others.

I speak out often about what I see as lesbian bashing, the perpetuation of lesbian stereotypes, and narrow definitions of what lesbian is or can be in butch femme circles. It makes it tough to speak out when some BF lesbians seem to be imposing these same narrow definitions back onto people.

[CherylNYC]

i am too tired to make sense. But i will try.

Whenever someone talks about defending an identity, they are in deep water. Basically, it's a battle already lost (to mix my metaphors)....

2) It tends to have an agenda that is in part reactionary. France's is an anti-immigrant racism lurking behind that pride in French culture. Here? Who knows? Probably some transphobia....



Martina, I'm not sure why you wrote this particular thing. It's an accusation that you don't explain or support. I understand that you take issue with someone, anyone, defining what it means to be a lesbian, but why did you write that doing so "probably (has) some(thing to do with) transphobia"?

I have no trouble defining what being a lesbian means to me. It means that I'm a woman who has sex with and partners with other women. As it happens, butch women. Very butch women. It has nothing to do with whether or not I'm stone. (yep, I am.) It has nothing to do with whether or not I'm currently having sex. (not much lately, but a girl can hope.)

If I say that for me to call myself a lesbian I would have to by and large continue to fit the above criteria, why is that transphobic?

[christie]

I have been following the conversation and can genuinely understand Kobi's frustration and disappointment in that the thread simply about being proud to be a lesbian as turned into another dismantling, redefining of a word.

Some may not agree, but I do see how "lesbian" has been marginalized in online BF communities. That I ID as femme yet openly admit attraction to other femmes has been met with less than open arms, mostly by masculine ID'd or transmen. That's not me being transphobic or a misandrist, but it is my personal experience.

I do think that defining lesbian does include who you fuck. I made some choices in my 20's to try and walk that hetero path. It was a choice. It didn't change that I was a lesbian; however, to me, I didn't get to claim being a lesbian because I had the legal rights and privileges associated with being a heterosexual. I didn't claim it because I wasn't getting the shit beat out of me for fucking women. I didn't claim it because I didn't get disowned/kicked out for fucking women. I didn't get to claim it because I wasn't living as one.

The unfortunate part of re-defining lesbian (to me) is that there are legalities attached to it - if I had the same rights as a heterosexual woman, it probably wouldn't matter so much that the persons claiming the ID might not actively fuck women. I think that as I came to live an authentic, true to myself life, I have become more protective of that descriptor. I have fought to claim it, both personally, socially and professionally.

I will say that I have never experienced so much interpretation, defining, re-interpretation, re-defining, dismantling, rebuilding, casting aside and reclaiming of descriptors as I have in the online BF communities. I don't see it in other queer online communities and I don't see it in my real life communities.

Jess and I attended a Melissa Etheridge concert last week. Holy cow - ten thousand or so folks, mostly lesbians. I saw a great many interactions, but not once did I hear a conversation about descriptors. (Some may not like my use of "descriptors" but that's the place in my life that IDing words fall) One might argue that it wasn't the venue for such conversations to take place, but in all of my real-time interactions with a great number of queers, OC (online communities) are the ONLY place it takes happens. The only time I have been involved with these types of conversations in real time is when I am in a group of folks who also participate in OC. Period. Many years of meaningful, raw conversations and not once can I recall if it mattered if one was female ID'd, masculine ID'd, femme, butch, etc. Femme and butch might have come into play if it was a conversation about what/who flips my switches, but none of what I call the overanalyzation of words.

I really do give less than a damn about how folks ID. The only IDs that matter to me are mine and Jess' - and the only time hers matters is when its being cast aside, erased or questioned.

I completely understand how it feels to be erased or feel made less than - lesbian HAS been dismissed in BF online communities and its because we lesbians allowed it to happen. Shame on me for not speaking louder. Shame on me for conceding space. Shame on me for being complacent.

Sometimes, I think I am just too comfortable in my skin.

This is just my take on it - your mileage may vary.

[apretty]

Thanks to Martina, Julie, Dapper, Heart and others for pointing out that lesbian is as much a cultural, social, spiritual and political orientation and identity as it is sexual orientation.


Thanks for reiterating this--My politics have always been lesbian.

I have to say, I want space here and I want space elsewhere and it would be hard to choose where to align myself if I had to make that choice.

(Not to BullDog, specifically) Also, what's with the qualifiers--Why explain that you don't touch vagina but you're still a lesbian? That for me, feels like qualifying your space in *here* and that for me, feels like discomfort.

*I am speaking to the Stonefemmes because if feels like for me, that "stone" is frequently used in threads about ..well, anything and in here, in particularly it seems if not dismantling, at least divisive.

[BullDog]

I think the reason I bring up stone butch and lesbian together is because lesbian sex/sexuality gets very stereotyped in BF land. I always hear Stones saying the reason they are stone is because they aren't lesbian. Kinda bugs me.

Re-reading my post it probably wasn't all that relevant to what I was saying, other than Stone is central to my sexual orientation as is being a lesbian. Also, being a lesbian is more than my sexual orientation.

[Martina]

If I say that for me to call myself a lesbian I would have to by and large continue to fit the above criteria, why is that transphobic?

i think that going out of one's way to defend or reclaim and ID that is changing usually has a reason. One is being defensive or wanting to take something back from a group or groups who one may feel has appropriated your ID. That generally means exclusion.

Here's a quote from a post made later in the thread by the OP:

I am tired of feeling invisible in my own community. I am tired of feeling like a guest in my own community.

I just wanted a place to be where others like me can get together and say "hey yea we are still here and we are still ok and we still have a voice and we're not going away."

So who is making this person feel invisible? Who is NOT like her? i am guessing maybe transfolk or people involved with them. Or perhaps male-ID'd or bisexuals -- not sure. But there is some group the poster is talking about.

[Kobi]

Having caught up on the recent posts, there are a few things I want to address.

Bulldog, you asked why I was so disappointed and suggested you didnt understand the intent of this thread.

Lets review. This is what Kobi said way back when:
-----
"When I started this thread, I hoped it would not turn into a debate of terminology, or who owns what words, or who has the current rights to whatever.

I am a freakin lesbian - one of those relic women who wants to be with women who want to be with other women.

I am tired of feeling invisible in my own community. I am tired of feeling like a guest in my own community.

I just wanted a place to be where others like me can get together and say "hey yea we are still here and we are still ok and we still have a voice and we're not going away."

Is that too much to ask?"
--------
So, this was supposed to be a thread by and for female, lesbian, feminists, like me, who identify as that "outdated" concept of a female homosexual who are feeling invisible in their own community.

Is there some part of this that is or was unclear? If you dont identify as this, why is this discussion any of your concern?

I even said, several times, that I did not want this to deteriorate into a discussion on terminology and linguistics. Yet that is exactly what happened.

Several of you have taken issue with what you perceive as a narrow definition of what a lesbian is because you favor a broader more inclusive one. I am sure that a broader view suits your purposes and realities just as my narrower view suits my purposes, my reality, and the purpose of this thread.

I promise not to impose my reality on you and would appreciate if you would stop inflicting yours on me. We are both entitled to our own and neither should be negating the other.

Someone mentioned transphobia in here and I saw red. This discussion is about female, lesbian, feminists for female, lesbian, feminists. It has nothing to do with transpeople. The transpeople here have been nothing but supportive, kind, understanding, and respectful to me as a female, lesbian, feminist.

I wish I could say the same for other women. The biggest weird stuff I see on this thread and even in other lesbian threads, is women taking issue with other women. Women negating other women. Women baiting other women. It is women against women. And, from where I stand, that smacks of misogyny, sexism, and big time homophobia. And that just is not acceptable.

And it is women going after other women, in effect silencing their voices. Take this thread as a prime example. The purpose was clear but folks who didnt fit the id had to come in and turn it into something else. Take the leaping thread and its discussion on BV. Women who hadnt had the need to leap in ages, suddenly develop the need to leap in and effectively stopped the discussion. And when their behavior is pointed out to them, they respond with righteous indignation. Huh?

So, the question begging to be asked, is why are women so threatened by female, lesbian, feminists having serious discussions about issues that affect women, lesbians and feminists? The only reason to consistently and systematically shutdown serious discussions like these is fear. So, what is so threatening that it provokes the need to sabotage other women?

This is the stuff behind the linguistics that really needs to be aired. Serious stuff about females, women, using their voices, being heard, being respected, being seen, being appreciated, being understood, being treated as valuable, contributing members of this community by other women.

There are many regressions occuring out there in the big world. But we cant even begin to address the regressions out there until we deal with the regressions of members of our own community directed at other members of our own community.

And it really irks me, when I see women who take up everyone elses causes, writing pages and pages of support and outrage, finding all kinds of candle vigil pictures, advocating for protests and emails and petitions. And yet when it comes to the causes of other women in this community, all we can do is infighting, rude vulgaries, and negating? That is pretty fucking sad.

And Martina, those are MY words you used. You referred to ME as "this person". Wow, gee, thanks. That makes me feel really visible and validated. And rather than ask me why I felt invisible, you went ahead in an inflammatory way and made assumptions and presumptions. Homophobia and misogyny....the gifts that just keep on giving. I wish I could say I am surprised but I am not. This kind of bullshit has become par for the course. And it is a fine example of the bullshit women do to other women.

I may have a different reality than some of the rest of you. I am very thankful for it. Nothing like being around supportive people who dont have the need or desire to tear anyone else down.

Maybe, someday, it will happen here.

[BullDog]

Well Kobi I am a lesbian, have been for over 30 years. I am a woman attracted to women, so I do fit your definition.

I often feel invisible or disrespected in BF circles as well- it's due to the stereotypes and narrow conceptions of lesbian that get thrown out- no matter who is saying them.

There are quite a number of lesbians that are part of this community who do partner with male identified/male people. They are lesbians as well. They are human beings- not linguistic debate or terminology.

I am happy to discuss my points of interest in a different lesbian thread if this really is so upsetting to you.

[Turtle]

So, I've been going thru some stuff lately and a friend of mine gave me a few old school lesbian novels from the 1970s and 80s. At first, I was like "I dunno," but then I thought "Yeah, maybe I should revisit this time period, remembering the old women's bookstores that are almost all gone, Womankind Books, Naiad Press and the like when the publishing world was in such a different place and book for us, or any non-white non-hetero-normative group, were so hard to come by.

So, anyway, I'm reading the books and being thankful for those who have gone before me.



AND I feel a constant sorrow for wanting to be more active in the local community, but (I know it's my choice but) I won't step foot in our local Queer center because it used to be called The Lambda Center and now after much discussion, with all views being heard, they still chose to rename it The Gay and Lesbian Center. And I just won't participate in the erasure of folks like that.

[CherylNYC]

i think that going out of one's way to defend or reclaim and ID that is changing usually has a reason. One is being defensive or wanting to take something back from a group or groups who one may feel has appropriated your ID. That generally means exclusion. ...

..So who is making this person feel invisible? Who is NOT like her? i am guessing maybe transfolk or people involved with them. Or perhaps male-ID'd or bisexuals -- not sure. But there is some group the poster is talking about.

Martina, I asked a specific question. Why did you write this?:

"2) It tends to have an agenda that is in part reactionary.... Here? Who knows? Probably some transphobia...."

The discussion is about lesbians. You haven't stated a reason why you would conclude that a discussion about lesbian ID taking place amongst women who feel that their lesbian ID is embattled "Probably (has) some transphobia". You've made an unsupported assumption. Why does a discussion about a female ID have to have something to do with males? ("transfolk, male ID'd... transphobia")

Is it possible to discuss lesbian pride without discussing males or male IDs?

[citybutch]

I have little to say... and much to contribute.

http://writingforstrangers.com/writing/non-fictionopinion/reclaiming-femme-queer-women-of-colour-and-femme-identity/

[citybutch]

So simplistic... BUT we did not always have the "label" lesbian....in fact we have had many labels we have embraced. And not always have lesbians embraced butch/femme identity. In fact, there was a time I can remember where butches were rejected as embracing male identity and male roles...

This is merely an observation.. and not a critique of how anyone identifies here...

I find community with you all....

http://sitemaker.umich.edu/lesbian.history/framed__butches_in_pictures_1920-1970

[Martina]

Martina, I asked a specific question. Why did you write this?:

"2) It tends to have an agenda that is in part reactionary.... Here? Who knows? Probably some transphobia...."

The discussion is about lesbians. You haven't stated a reason why you would conclude that a discussion about lesbian ID taking place amongst women who feel that their lesbian ID is embattled "Probably (has) some transphobia". You've made an unsupported assumption. Why does a discussion about a female ID have to have something to do with males? ("transfolk, male ID'd... transphobia")

Is it possible to discuss lesbian pride without discussing males or male IDs?

That was my interpretation. i seriously don't know what else to say. i think that when one defends an ID, like being French, one is defending AGAINST something, like being an immigrant of African or Arab descent. That is what i meant. i don't know what else to say. i am sorry.

[Linus]

[Posting as a member]

Kobi, I hope if it's ok that I interject here. I don't want to take away something that is important for lesbian members and if I'm speaking out of turn, I apologize.

That was my interpretation. i seriously don't know what else to say. i think that when one defends an ID, like being French, one is defending AGAINST something, like being an immigrant of African or Arab descent. That is what i meant. i don't know what else to say. i am sorry.

Martina, I'm a bit puzzled. I'm not sure where an association of claiming an identity automatically means that you're against something. I claim many identities: transguy, geek, Acadian, Canadian, immigrant, intelligent (or so I believe), middle-aged, etc.

But none of those mean that I'm against anyone who isn't in those categories. Just because someone identifies as lesbian (sexual identity) doesn't mean that they are automatically against trans-individuals (gender identity). To me, this kind of idea -- "us vs. them" -- is contrary and does nothing more but to divide the LGBT community as a whole. There are transwomen who are lesbians and transmen who are gay. By claiming those identities doesn't mean self-hatred.

Now, are there lesbians who dislike transmen and transwomen? Sure. But I do not believe that is what this discussion is about. It's about (and Kobi, please correct me if I'm wrong on this) reclaiming lesbian as a positive and proud title and not something that one should be ashamed of, least of all in one's own community.

[Martina]

[Posting as a member]

I'm not sure where an association of claiming an identity automatically means that you're against something.


It does not. Of course. Defending or reclaiming one might be taking a position against another. It often is the case. i have given examples.

Let's look at this quote -- from Kobi, whom i did not mean to offend by not using her name.

I am a freakin lesbian - one of those relic women who wants to be with women who want to be with other women.

I am tired of feeling invisible in my own community. I am tired of feeling like a guest in my own community.

Who MIGHT be making her feel like a guest in her OWN community? Perhaps someone NOT a "woman who wants to be with other women?" i am guessing. The possibilities of people who choose to ID as lesbian but are not women loving women are somewhat limited. i speculated.

There's a ton of research on identity formation, much of which talks about how it is created by defining oneself in opposition to the other, by disavowing another group. i think that's a normal way of thinking. But ID formation on a greater than individual level is sticky stuff. i used to be offended (as a woman) by definitions of femme that implied that a reconsidered and reconstructed femme femininity was somehow superior to that of straight women. Anyway, femme cultural products are full of such statements. Less so anymore.

My point is that ID formation can come out of disavowals of the other. It can disparage the other. Definitions that imply that straight women are less reflective of or transgressive in their femininity are examples.

But when you take it up a level to DEFENDING a supposedly beleaguered identity, you enter into a discourse that does more than potentially demean the other. The poor me stuff can lead to justifications for exclusion or worse. It's the rhetoric of oppression. The speakers may SOUND like victims, but they are justifying something else.

So i am not calling anyone here an oppressor. But this kind of discourse is dangerous. In any context.

[apretty]

When E and I were at a concert a few weeks ago there were about a thousand lesbians, I sat next to a couple who were nice enough--They weren't "like us" in the sense that there wasn't any B/F going on but they were sweet and in fact invited me/us to a swim party some time this month...

(*Of course I broke the ice by asking if either of them had spotted their therapists, yet and while E kept his distance as he's apt to do, I had two temporary BFFs though by first appearance I am sure they didn't know what to make of me in my glam-ass maxi dress and gold accessories.)

In the course of our short conversations between songs, my seat-neighbor made it clear that she was glad that a "mannnnn" wasn't sitting next to her and made a sound and face in disgust. I countered with my standard head-tilt and vague puzzled look followed with half-smile to acknowledge her discomfort with men but to also let her know (hopefully) that I didn't share in her thinking.

Of course this is just a single instance but it does speak to the sort of 'phobia' that we've been hinting at, I think. A maleness phobia/distrust (that possibly butches bring to the table by appearance/manner/what have you...) I mean, it's one thing for a Femme to bring her "femininity" but that's ultimately accepted because it's less threatening... Easily dismissed.

So, I guess I don't have a big, huge point except to speak to my experience in "lesbian" space as it's difficult to additionally, have my queer self understood...

And I am not blind to how the lesbian identity has been disparaged over the years (online and elsewhere)... Which has me thinking about women and legitimacy and this devaluing of "lesbian" is more of the same devaluing of another being deemed "female". Which really, that's the part that keeps me from abandoning "lesbian" altogether because I refuse to be a part of that women othering women.

Forgive if I make less than total sense--I should have been in bed hours ago, please feel free to request clarification. Thanks.

[JustJo]

And it is women going after other women, in effect silencing their voices. Take this thread as a prime example. The purpose was clear but folks who didnt fit the id had to come in and turn it into something else. Take the leaping thread and its discussion on BV. Women who hadnt had the need to leap in ages, suddenly develop the need to leap in and effectively stopped the discussion. And when their behavior is pointed out to them, they respond with righteous indignation. Huh?

Okay, so I had promised myself I would stay out of this thread...but now find that I can't.

Kobi...regarding the part that I put in red....since you're referring to me, among others.

I was not silencing anyone. I was having my own conversation in a thread that does not have a single directed OP. It's an open thread, and has a light-hearted title.

My "righteous indignation" (which it wasn't, by the way)...was at MY being silenced by another member who felt the need to come in and play thread police.

If you feel silenced by others having their own conversation or having fun, then I'm sorry.

I will also honor the fact that you clearly don't want anyone here who doesn't specifically agree with you...and leave.

And, by the way, I'm a lesbian.

[CherylNYC]

It does not. Of course. Defending or reclaiming one might be taking a position against another. It often is the case. i have given examples.

Let's look at this quote -- from Kobi, whom i did not mean to offend by not using her name.



Who MIGHT be making her feel like a guest in her OWN community? Perhaps someone NOT a "woman who wants to be with other women?" i am guessing. The possibilities of people who choose to ID as lesbian but are not women loving women are somewhat limited. i speculated.

There's a ton of research on identity formation, much of which talks about how it is created by defining oneself in opposition to the other, by disavowing another group. i think that's a normal way of thinking. But ID formation on a greater than individual level is sticky stuff. i used to be offended (as a woman) by definitions of femme that implied that a reconsidered and reconstructed femme femininity was somehow superior to that of straight women. Anyway, femme cultural products are full of such statements. Less so anymore.

My point is that ID formation can come out of disavowals of the other. It can disparage the other. Definitions that imply that straight women are less reflective of or transgressive in their femininity are examples.

But when you take it up a level to DEFENDING a supposedly beleaguered identity, you enter into a discourse that does more than potentially demean the other. The poor me stuff can lead to justifications for exclusion or worse. It's the rhetoric of oppression. The speakers may SOUND like victims, but they are justifying something else.

So i am not calling anyone here an oppressor. But this kind of discourse is dangerous. In any context.

I can't speak for Kobi, but I can say unequivocally that when I use the word 'lesbian' to identify myself I have been met with some hostility from people who, in another time and place, would have certainly been called lesbians, and probably would have called themselves lesbians. In some circles, including b-f communities, calling oneself a lesbian is considered uncool, a relic from former times, and a word associated with people who would choose to oppress those who don't fit into a narrow definition of what it means to be a woman who has sex with and partners with other women. There have been lesbians who claim I can't be one because I'm a stonefemme, because I'm a leatherwoman, and because I partner with butch women. I very powerfully, emphatically, and crankily claim the label LESBIAN because I am one. F.U. to anyone who attempts to tell me otherwise.

There have been plenty of straight POCs who attempt to police the behaviours of LGBT POCs. Some have claimed that gayness is a white disease. Does that make LGBT POCs disavow their connection to their communities? Not usually, and yet that's a common response amongst those who might once have called themselves lesbians. Because some lesbians have attempted to police their (b-f, trans, leather), IDs, they eschew the use of the label. Some of the not-very-bright people who have challenged my lesbian ID have done so because they assume it must mean I'm a transphobe.

The reason I'm hammering this point with you Martina, is that there is not one place in my general definition or in my self ID that has anything to do with males or transphobia. You brought that accusation into the thread spuriously, and you have yet to support the accusation with any quote. You merely assert that feeling defended around the use of this, in my opinion, embattled ID, must have something to do with transphobia. This is inflammatory because in my experience, unsupported accusations of transphobia are sometimes used to shut down conversations about lesbian ID.

I'm a prickly, argumentative person when I get riled up. Attempts to shut me down don't work very well, but others who are not as verbally aggressive as I am will walk away from those conversations where their lesbian ID has been mocked or denigrated feeling disempowered and invalidated. This is the reason why 'Lesbian Pride' is a topic of importance to me. Unless one is foolish enough to personally challenge my ID, there's nothing "dangerous" about this discourse.

[Kobi]

[Posting as a member]

Kobi, I hope if it's ok that I interject here. I don't want to take away something that is important for lesbian members and if I'm speaking out of turn, I apologize.



Martina, I'm a bit puzzled. I'm not sure where an association of claiming an identity automatically means that you're against something. I claim many identities: transguy, geek, Acadian, Canadian, immigrant, intelligent (or so I believe), middle-aged, etc.

But none of those mean that I'm against anyone who isn't in those categories. Just because someone identifies as lesbian (sexual identity) doesn't mean that they are automatically against trans-individuals (gender identity). To me, this kind of idea -- "us vs. them" -- is contrary and does nothing more but to divide the LGBT community as a whole. There are transwomen who are lesbians and transmen who are gay. By claiming those identities doesn't mean self-hatred.

Now, are there lesbians who dislike transmen and transwomen? Sure. But I do not believe that is what this discussion is about. It's about (and Kobi, please correct me if I'm wrong on this) reclaiming lesbian as a positive and proud title and not something that one should be ashamed of, least of all in one's own community.


Linus,

Again thank you for being supportive. Ironic how transmen "get it". No drama, no rudeness. They seem to just get it.

I do, however, take exception to "lesbian" being downgraded to a "sexual identity".

For some of us, it is not a just sexual identity. It is something special, unique, and very specific that defines who we are at the core of our beings and, in many cases, what we stand for. It is way bigger than a sexual identity.

And reclaiming lesbian, minus all the qualifiers and the politics that spur them, is about pride and self respect. It is about taking back something that is being dismantled and parcelled out amongst other groups for their own purposes who seem to have little regard for those they are affecting.

Lesbian is not less than, a lesser part of, outdated, not enough or any of the other dismissal and derogatory things that are happening around it.

And, it is about opening your mouth when you see it happening, calling it what it is, and making it clear it is not appreciated or acceptable. What is happening is hurtful, divisive, dismissive, oppressive, offensive, and simply rude.

[ScandalAndy]

I'm a lesbian, I'm proud to be a lesbian, and I'm a little tired of the last few threads I've checked out being turned into a discussion of what "lesbian" means, followed by lots of people trying to reinvent the wheel by asking "well what about this situation? Do they count?". What the heck? Why is that necessary? I want to come here and support others and feel supported, not questioned.


Is it very difficult to accept that the identifier of "lesbian" can apply to many different people with different interpretations, and that we can all find community with one another, even if we don't share the same definition of the word?


I'm so frustrated with the threads right now and I personally feel like we can't get more than two or three people together without it somehow turning into a need to have a debate or prove a point. I really want BFP to be a place where I can find support and community, and lately I feel like all I find is another opportunity to get really defensive. Maybe I'm just having a bad day, but maybe it's more than that.

I interpreted this thread as Kobi's attempt to say "hey, I'm here. Anybody else?" without the drive to have a big analytical debate. I"m seeing a lot of posturing and defensiveness and that makes me really sad. Why is this happening?


Again, let me reiterate that this is my personal opinion, you can agree or disagree with me as you see fit, and I respect your right to do so.

[Kobi]

I have little to say... and much to contribute.

http://writingforstrangers.com/writing/non-fictionopinion/reclaiming-femme-queer-women-of-colour-and-femme-identity/

So simplistic... BUT we did not always have the "label" lesbian....in fact we have had many labels we have embraced. And not always have lesbians embraced butch/femme identity. In fact, there was a time I can remember where butches were rejected as embracing male identity and male roles...

This is merely an observation.. and not a critique of how anyone identifies here...

I find community with you all....

http://sitemaker.umich.edu/lesbian.history/framed__butches_in_pictures_1920-1970




Thank you for these interesting links. I learned some stuff.

At the risk of being repetitive, which is getting as tiring for me as I am sure it is getting for you, this thread is NOT about defining lesbian or qualifying what a lesbian is, or any other derivative of lesbian.

The intent of this thread was for lesbians who identify a certain way to talk about issues related to their reality.

So far, it has been anything but. And the trend continues.

We have a butch zone, a femme zone, a trans zone, and a little late to the party lesbian zone. Within each zone is a heck of a lot of empty space. Is there some reason people have the need to continue to corrupt this particular thread into what they need it to be rather than what it is for?

Want to be supportive? Please do so.

Want to interject your own definitions, realities, need to meld blend blur? To me, that is a deliberate attempt to turn this into something other than the repeatedly stated intent. It is behavior that smacks of fear and feeling threatened. So, again, what is so threatening about lesbians reclaiming their voices and their power as a force in this community?

[Thinker]

Good morning!

I've been away most of the weekend and just now got caught up in this thread (responding to a handful of reported posts we received).

It seems there *have* been efforts made to keep responses/challenges at a respectful level. Thanks for that. :)

If you don't mind my take on things.....????

There is a little battle here over exactly what 'lesbian' entails. The bottom line is that we are simply NOT going to all land on *exactly* the same definition. But because we all place value on who we are as individuals and how we self-identify, it seems pretty simple that we should also afford that same right to others.

Like I always say... I don't have to agree nor do I have to fully understand, but I respect you and how you feel about it.

I don't feel like I'm giving up anything/conceding by saying that either. There is room in this world for all of us.

Kobi, I'm sorry for your frustration. I know what you did and didn't want in this particular space (thread). But, you know, just about every new discussion that pops up veers away from the original intent and toward something else. A lot of the time that totally sucks, and some of the time it is a wonderful thing.

I do think it is best that we leave transphobia out of this discussion. Perhaps another thread altogether if someone feels the need to do so??? It doesn't feel good to have something like that implied, and it's perfectly understandable why an individual would challenge that implication. In addition, it makes a thread that was meant to celebrate lesbian pride about some other identity.

This is a second gentle reminder to be respectful to other members. If you feel you just can't do that here, then it might be a good idea to visit the thread at a later time.

Thinker (moderator)

[Medusa]

I'm a lesbian, I'm proud to be a lesbian, and I'm a little tired of the last few threads I've checked out being turned into a discussion of what "lesbian" means, followed by lots of people trying to reinvent the wheel by asking "well what about this situation? Do they count?". What the heck? Why is that necessary? I want to come here and support others and feel supported, not questioned.


Is it very difficult to accept that the identifier of "lesbian" can apply to many different people with different interpretations, and that we can all find community with one another, even if we don't share the same definition of the word?


I'm so frustrated with the threads right now and I personally feel like we can't get more than two or three people together without it somehow turning into a need to have a debate or prove a point. I really want BFP to be a place where I can find support and community, and lately I feel like all I find is another opportunity to get really defensive. Maybe I'm just having a bad day, but maybe it's more than that.

I interpreted this thread as Kobi's attempt to say "hey, I'm here. Anybody else?" without the drive to have a big analytical debate. I"m seeing a lot of posturing and defensiveness and that makes me really sad. Why is this happening?


Again, let me reiterate that this is my personal opinion, you can agree or disagree with me as you see fit, and I respect your right to do so.


This post really spoke to me.

ScandalAndy - I'm going to use this as a bouncing off point!

Folks, here we have a person who is fairly new to our community who has demonstrated something I think we need to be reminded of. I think many of us are skilled at diving deep within an issue and teasing it out because we have been doing it for a long, long time. We have a certain level of dialog in this community that is sometimes very process-y, sometimes very abrupt. I think that can look and feel really off-putting to people who are new to this space.

Especially people reading a thread title, thinking that the thread is going to be go the direction of the thread title, and then once they enter the thread, seeing that people are arguing or debating over minutiae. I am not saying that type of micro-processing isn't a good thing but I want the "big picture" of the thread to be honored.

Some of us have been super pissed off about the erasure of women with the Butch Voices thing going on. I think that type of marginalization can echo in threads like these where "Lesbian" is being defined for the purpose of the thread as "women into other women" and all of the sudden we are discussion bio men, gay men, Butches who identify as men, trans men, etc.

Not at all saying that men or male-identity issues need to be parsed completely from this discussion. Not into that kind of separatism, but I do think we need to be focusing on "women into women".

[Kobi]

It does not. Of course. Defending or reclaiming one might be taking a position against another. It often is the case. i have given examples.

Let's look at this quote -- from Kobi, whom i did not mean to offend by not using her name.



Who MIGHT be making her feel like a guest in her OWN community? Perhaps someone NOT a "woman who wants to be with other women?" i am guessing. The possibilities of people who choose to ID as lesbian but are not women loving women are somewhat limited. i speculated.

There's a ton of research on identity formation, much of which talks about how it is created by defining oneself in opposition to the other, by disavowing another group. i think that's a normal way of thinking. But ID formation on a greater than individual level is sticky stuff. i used to be offended (as a woman) by definitions of femme that implied that a reconsidered and reconstructed femme femininity was somehow superior to that of straight women. Anyway, femme cultural products are full of such statements. Less so anymore.

My point is that ID formation can come out of disavowals of the other. It can disparage the other. Definitions that imply that straight women are less reflective of or transgressive in their femininity are examples.

But when you take it up a level to DEFENDING a supposedly beleaguered identity, you enter into a discourse that does more than potentially demean the other. The poor me stuff can lead to justifications for exclusion or worse. It's the rhetoric of oppression. The speakers may SOUND like victims, but they are justifying something else.

So i am not calling anyone here an oppressor. But this kind of discourse is dangerous. In any context.



"The rheotoric of oppression. Poor me stuff. SOUND like victims."

Wow powerful stuff. Sends a big message. In the midst of what is going on here, it is plain and simple deflection. And, it is further evidence of misogyny, sexism, and homophobia being alive and well in our own community.

Lesbians, like me, have a reason or many reasons to feel the way we do. The danger is in remaining silent thereby being complicit in our own victimization.

There are kids out there, like me. Who will speak for them? Who will be role models for them? Who will help them forge their identities and their pride and their heritage?

I dont have to take away from another or be in opposition to another just to be who I am. But I will be damned if I will stand by silently while other groups are doing it to me.

Funny things those semantics huh?

[Martina]

This is inflammatory because in my experience, unsupported accusations of transphobia are sometimes used to shut down conversations about lesbian ID.


i have seen that too. Or about any issue around women. It was not my intent to shut down discussion of lesbian identity or to divert it to a discussion of transphobia. i probably could have made all my points without saying that. i am sure it is part of the mix of motivations for some folks who use this rhetoric because it is explicitly said. Not here. i agree with you.

i am not saying that there aren't many other reasons to experience lesbian ID as challenged. i hate defending myself, but on the dash site, i spent a lot of time and energy trying to end the lesbian bashing that was tolerated for so long there.

In any case, i agree with the moderators that parsing this out is probably the work of another thread.

Re the assumption of lesbian = woman loving woman, i gotta say that on this site, that IS excluding folk. i guess we know that.

[BullDog]

I do agree that the focus of lesbian threads should be on women. However within the context of our community there are also a significant number of lesbians partnered with males/male identified people. I think lesbian needs to be discussed and understood within this broader context. They are women, so the focus is still on women. Also many males/male identified persons do have ties to the lesbian community. It is part of their herstory/history.

[Jess]

http://www.deviantart.com/download/60485561/Lesbian_Pride_by_blackiliner.png

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSuXt-e0mK50x4ZJ3i6FEPLY7J3dXKAcUButa-nBkHVAsfgqncr

[dreadgeek]

Yes, language is important -- which is why I chose the words I did: I will stand with anyone under the banner of lesbian pride -- because pride is about community, as well as individuals, and for me pride doesn't have to be about sameness.

But... I am not ready to agree that anyone is whatever they wish to call themselves. I've thought about this over time... I don't control what others say they are, and I don't police it, but that doesn't mean I see whatever they tell me to see. Someone who has no claim to any Native American Tribe, but decides that they want to call themselves Native American is not identifying, they are appropriating.

Heart

I have to echo this because, in fact, I think words do have meaning. My oldest friend is a cis-gendered, heterosexual white man. I love Jeff as my brother. If Jeff EVER were to do the "I'm a lesbian too, we both love women, yuk yuk" schtick it would go hard on him. NOT because I think someone must have two X chromosomes to be a lesbian but because him saying that he's a lesbian would stretch the definition of lesbian far beyond its breaking point. He would be appropriating the term and I would take a dim view of that. So while it is emotionally satisfying to say that people are whatever they say they are, not only is that not what we actually mean it would be incoherent if it were!

If it were the case that all one had to do to be, say, black in America would be to say "I'm black" then saying that there are black people would be meaningless. Since I've met you, Heart, I'm going to use you as an example (with the caveat that I KNOW you would never do this). If you were to roll up on me and say "what's up my n---er?!" by way of greeting and then, when I looked at you with my "you might want to explain yourself real quick" look and you discoursed on how you 'identified' as black and therefore you were using the 'n-word' black person to black person, I would probably place you in front of the nearest mirror and ask you to look at the two of us until you'd worked it out. What I *wouldn't* do is just accept that you get to say you are black and know what it is like to be black in America. Now, to be clear, if someone who *is* black comes up and greets me with the n-word it's still not going to go well for them but for completely different reasons. Well, mostly completely different--I find it the height of hypocrisy for us in the black community to use that word with one another while at the same time bristling when a white person uses the word. But that's a different conversation entirely and not one I'm having here.

That said, consistency matters. The next time someone reading this thinks that someone is whatever it is they say they are, imagine the likes of a Rush Limbaugh claiming that he is a lesbian and AS A LESBIAN can speak about what lesbian lives and loves are like. Imagine then that he launches on some virulently homophobic diatribe all under the cover of loving critique of the lesbian community which he claims as his own. Does Rush Limbaugh have any place to talk about lesbian lives, claiming that his identity as a lesbian gives him a place at the table and a voice? I'm sorry but I would have to say that it doesn't. If it does, then 'lesbian' is an empty word signifying absolutely nothing. That is an erasure I am not willing to stand by for nor could I make an argument in favor of standing by for it. If, however, we are going to deny Mr. Limbaugh the right to identify himself as a lesbian because he is a cisgendered, heterosexual male then we need to at least be willing to consider that lesbian might have meaning, that it might form a boundary of sorts, and that just as my wife--who I love dearly--has no claim to a black identify, people who are not within that boundary have no claim to lesbian identity. That doesn't mean that they are bad people or that they have no legitimate identity of their own, simply that for them to claim a lesbian identity is meaningless. And it has to be (or at least should be) based upon something that can be fairly applied instead of "well, of course, Rush Limbaugh has no right because I dislike/disagree with him". That's not a solid enough case.



Cheers
Aj

[ScandalAndy]

This post really spoke to me.

ScandalAndy - I'm going to use this as a bouncing off point!

Folks, here we have a person who is fairly new to our community who has demonstrated something I think we need to be reminded of. I think many of us are skilled at diving deep within an issue and teasing it out because we have been doing it for a long, long time. We have a certain level of dialog in this community that is sometimes very process-y, sometimes very abrupt. I think that can look and feel really off-putting to people who are new to this space.

Especially people reading a thread title, thinking that the thread is going to be go the direction of the thread title, and then once they enter the thread, seeing that people are arguing or debating over minutiae. I am not saying that type of micro-processing isn't a good thing but I want the "big picture" of the thread to be honored.

Some of us have been super pissed off about the erasure of women with the Butch Voices thing going on. I think that type of marginalization can echo in threads like these where "Lesbian" is being defined for the purpose of the thread as "women into other women" and all of the sudden we are discussion bio men, gay men, Butches who identify as men, trans men, etc.

Not at all saying that men or male-identity issues need to be parsed completely from this discussion. Not into that kind of separatism, but I do think we need to be focusing on "women into women".



Please let me add that I really enjoy the micro-processing. There are a lot of brilliant minds here that have very enlightening through processes and are able to view things from perspectives that I myself am not privy to. I really appreciate that type of approach as well, and I don't want anyone to think that I am attempting to marginalize or invalidate those thoughts.




Getting back on topic from my mini derail, I'm proud to call myself a lesbian, but I"m noticing more and more that younger folks are consciously refusing to do so because they feel the identifier is too restrictive. I'm wondering if there are any constructive and inclusive ways to represent lesbian pride as the wonderful thing it is and bring youth back into the community. Thoughts?

[Jess]

http://www.genders.org/g32/image/jagose_fig7.jpg

http://lh4.ggpht.com/fishwy/SE7emJS9ciI/AAAAAAAAAzk/549Qhp7mEKE/Jeanette%20Jenkins%20and%20lesbian%20lover%20Queen %20Latifah%20picture%5B3%5D.jpg

http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ldpccciO7U1qez5rio1_400.png

http://momento24.com/en/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/boda-lesbiana.jpg

http://www.slapupsidethehead.com/wp-content/media/2008/05/lesbians.jpg

one of these lesbians ain't like the other one...

[Kobi]

I have to echo this because, in fact, I think words do have meaning. My oldest friend is a cis-gendered, heterosexual white man. I love Jeff as my brother. If Jeff EVER were to do the "I'm a lesbian too, we both love women, yuk yuk" schtick it would go hard on him. NOT because I think someone must have two X chromosomes to be a lesbian but because him saying that he's a lesbian would stretch the definition of lesbian far beyond its breaking point. He would be appropriating the term and I would take a dim view of that. So while it is emotionally satisfying to say that people are whatever they say they are, not only is that not what we actually mean it would be incoherent if it were!

If it were the case that all one had to do to be, say, black in America would be to say "I'm black" then saying that there are black people would be meaningless. Since I've met you, Heart, I'm going to use you as an example (with the caveat that I KNOW you would never do this). If you were to roll up on me and say "what's up my n---er?!" by way of greeting and then, when I looked at you with my "you might want to explain yourself real quick" look and you discoursed on how you 'identified' as black and therefore you were using the 'n-word' black person to black person, I would probably place you in front of the nearest mirror and ask you to look at the two of us until you'd worked it out. What I *wouldn't* do is just accept that you get to say you are black and know what it is like to be black in America. Now, to be clear, if someone who *is* black comes up and greets me with the n-word it's still not going to go well for them but for completely different reasons. Well, mostly completely different--I find it the height of hypocrisy for us in the black community to use that word with one another while at the same time bristling when a white person uses the word. But that's a different conversation entirely and not one I'm having here.

That said, consistency matters. The next time someone reading this thinks that someone is whatever it is they say they are, imagine the likes of a Rush Limbaugh claiming that he is a lesbian and AS A LESBIAN can speak about what lesbian lives and loves are like. Imagine then that he launches on some virulently homophobic diatribe all under the cover of loving critique of the lesbian community which he claims as his own. Does Rush Limbaugh have any place to talk about lesbian lives, claiming that his identity as a lesbian gives him a place at the table and a voice? I'm sorry but I would have to say that it doesn't. If it does, then 'lesbian' is an empty word signifying absolutely nothing. That is an erasure I am not willing to stand by for nor could I make an argument in favor of standing by for it. If, however, we are going to deny Mr. Limbaugh the right to identify himself as a lesbian because he is a cisgendered, heterosexual male then we need to at least be willing to consider that lesbian might have meaning, that it might form a boundary of sorts, and that just as my wife--who I love dearly--has no claim to a black identify, people who are not within that boundary have no claim to lesbian identity. That doesn't mean that they are bad people or that they have no legitimate identity of their own, simply that for them to claim a lesbian identity is meaningless. And it has to be (or at least should be) based upon something that can be fairly applied instead of "well, of course, Rush Limbaugh has no right because I dislike/disagree with him". That's not a solid enough case.



Cheers
Aj


Wow. This is powerful, validating, and illuminating. Thank you.

( I am so psyched. I actually understood this without having to look anything up. :))

[Martina]

i agree that ID's have some content, but it's often not what we say it is. .

There is a point at which labels lose meaning, but what we should do, IMO, is to positively describe ourselves, and not try to create a totally coherent, unique, or prescriptive ID. Know that the ID is porous. Think of it as a loose description.

Think of how gay male identity has changed. Even though there is a genetic component, the stylized acts -- i think that is the judith butler term -- that mark gay men change over time. How gay men enact their gay male identity actually changes over time. It's a construct overlaying some basic behaviors not common to all members, some of which are genetically influenced.

You can't even say that much about race. There are no basic behaviors. There is no genetic history that is shared by all people who ID as African American. It may LOOK like it. But it's not there. There is no cultural or class content that is common to all. What is common to all is the experience of racism against African Americans in the U.S. That is not how the ID is understood, of course. We act as if we believe that there is a shared cultural and genetic content even if we know better.

So, yes, we do have to have ID's that are useful and do exclude some people. But it is important to acknowledge that on the level at which they are useful to us, the level of coherence, they are cultural constructs.

And creating coherent identity categories is full of pitfalls. We do it because it's useful and it's how humans think. But we should do it mindfully. We should not define ourselves in opposition to others. And we should not try to create prescriptive identities.

[dreadgeek]

i agree that ID's have some content, but it's often not what we say it is. .

There is a point at which labels lose meaning, but what we should do, IMO, is to positively describe ourselves, and not try to create a totally coherent, unique, or prescriptive ID. Know that the ID is porous. Think of it as a loose description.

I don't think that ID is all-encompassing--no particularly interesting sociological category you might know about me will give you anything like a complete picture. It won't even give you substantially accurate picture of me.


You can't even say that much about race. There are no basic behaviors. There is no genetic history that is shared by all people who ID as African American. It may LOOK like it. But it's not there. There is no cultural or class content that is common to all. What is common to all is the experience of racism against African Americans in the U.S. That is not how the ID is understood, of course. We act as if we believe that there is a shared cultural and genetic content even if we know better.

Actually, this is only partially accurate. There is now far LESS cultural continuity in the black community than when my parents were born in the first quarter of the last century. That said, I stand by my statement that if my partner--who is only a second generation American, her grandparents having come over in the 30s--were to start claiming that she is black and trying to explain to me how I needed to move through the world as a black woman, based upon her extensive experience, I would take a very dim view of that.
I would even go so far as to say that class is a powerful mitigating factor with racism. What racism looks like to me is *fundamentally* different than what it looks like to my cousin's on my father's side who grew up much poorer than my sister and I.



So, yes, we do have to have ID's that are useful and do exclude some people. But it is important to acknowledge that on the level at which they are useful to us, the level of coherence, they are cultural constructs.

And creating coherent identity categories is full of pitfalls. We do it because it's useful and it's how humans think. But we should do it mindfully. We should not define ourselves in opposition to others. And we should not try to create prescriptive identities.

Let's use my Rush Limbaugh example. Personal distaste for him notwithstanding, why should we be suspicious of Mr. Limbaugh if he were to launch into some diatribe about black lesbians if he were to state, beforehand, that his self-identity is that of a black lesbian and that any critique that he is putting forth is coming from a place of love and concern? This might be me, but I believe that as a black woman, I have room to offer necessary critiques of things happening within the black community that would NOT be welcome coming from someone who was, say, white. Now, if we are not creating prescriptive identities and if we're granting that these are just so many cultural constructs with no objective reality--and I don't think that this buys us what we might believe it does--then why should Mr. Limbaugh's critique NOT carry the same weight as mine since we are both claiming black and lesbian as our arbitrary, culturally constructed identities? Yet, most of us reading this thread would argue that if Mr. Limbaugh offers some critique about blacks or queers, it is more likely to be coming from a racist or homophobic place than if I offer a critique about one or both of those groups?


Cheers
Aj

[Martina]

Great stuff. i would love to continue, but am taking off for the day.

:)

[Apocalipstic]

Being a Lesbian has always been pretty confusing for those of us who do not fit the stereotype.

I would say the same thing for Femme. I am expected to be a certain way and can't live up to all that.

I want to reclaim Lesbian proudly, but Lesbians have never really claimed me, unless I was sleeping with them.

Have I only ever slept with Lesbian identified Women? No.

Do I like pussy? Oh Yeah!!!

Do I fit all the stereotypes? No.

Whats funny is with my straight friends I would say "Hell yeah I am a Lesbian! Out and Proud". Here? I get confused. I have so many things inside me and who I am attracted to is ever evolving. I don't want to feel like I need to be a certain way to be accepted.

[Kobi]

Please let me add that I really enjoy the micro-processing. There are a lot of brilliant minds here that have very enlightening through processes and are able to view things from perspectives that I myself am not privy to. I really appreciate that type of approach as well, and I don't want anyone to think that I am attempting to marginalize or invalidate those thoughts.

Getting back on topic from my mini derail, I'm proud to call myself a lesbian, but I"m noticing more and more that younger folks are consciously refusing to do so because they feel the identifier is too restrictive. I'm wondering if there are any constructive and inclusive ways to represent lesbian pride as the wonderful thing it is and bring youth back into the community. Thoughts?


Interesting question. I have an initial response that might grow as I think on it more.

I think there are many ways to do this. For me, it is a multi pronged approach.

The first, is reclaiming the word lesbian for myself. I am a lesbian. I used to use qualifiers and combine terms. Not any more. How can anyone relate to lesbian if we no longer use the word or we qualify it to death? Using it gives visibility that it is still alive and well and perking right along despite what others would prefer to think.

The second, is speaking to those issues surrounding lesbianism. It is speaking up when lesbian is equated with something passe, outdated, not good enough, and all the other negaters that have been mentioned in this thread. It is reclaiming our voice, our power, and our right to be.

The third, is starting threads like this in a zone meant for us. Young folk and newbies need to see lesbians are present and accounted for. They also need to see that we, as lesbians, have similar and dissimilar issues with others under the queer umbrella. They need to see we, as lesbians, can work in concert with other queers on issues we have in common, and we can forge ahead on our own to address those issues which affect us alone.

The fourth, remembering what youth entails i.e. a time to explore and experience, try stuff on, individuals deciding what works and doesnt work for them. As someone who was raised when homosexuality was still a psychistric diagnosis, I am all for taking advantage of the freedoms and options available today! But, all us queers, still need to accept some responsibility for being available to youth who may need us to be there and be visible. We didnt evolve in a vacuum. Neither will they.

[Apocalipstic]

Any suggestions on how those of us who are older and have never been accepted by the Lesbian community (though we definitely qualify, but don't look like we do) can find community and regain our sense of Pride?

[Apocalipstic]

I looked for Butch Femme community becasue I did not find acceptance in the Lesbian community. Though as a Lesbian (yes, a pussy/boycunt/little dick eating one) I seem to be on the fringes in the BF community too.

[dreadgeek]

Being a Lesbian has always been pretty confusing for those of us who do not fit the stereotype.

I would say the same thing for Femme. I am expected to be a certain way and can't live up to all that.

I want to reclaim Lesbian proudly, but Lesbians have never really claimed me, unless I was sleeping with them.

Have I only ever slept with Lesbian identified Women? No.

Do I like pussy? Oh Yeah!!!

Do I fit all the stereotypes? No.

Whats funny is with my straight friends I would say "Hell yeah I am a Lesbian! Out and Proud". Here? I get confused. I have so many things inside me and who I am attracted to is ever evolving. I don't want to feel like I need to be a certain way to be accepted.

I don't think anyone here fits any particular stereotype nor do I think one needs to fit them in order to have a place within a community. I don't fit the stereotype of either a lesbian or a black lesbian. Yet, I claim lesbian as part of my identity. This discussion illustrates the problem with identity politics. In fact, it illustrates both problems with IdPol and why I would love to see the queer community abandon it. the first problem is that identity politics, whatever utility it might have, is an invitation to a kind of hair-splitting, micro-parsing of language that obfuscates more than it illuminates. What I'm seeing happen now is that *because* identity has been used to exclude, we've decided that now identity (labels) are the problem. The issue, of course, is that we don't really abandon labels or qualifying our views based upon this or that sociological category. So in pursuit of not being boxed in by labels we've gone the other direction. It's not just 'lesbian doesn't encompass me' (if that is the stance one is taking) but "as a fat-positive, female-identified, black, butch geekgirl, I find labels restricting so I reject <insert label I've decided I don't want applied to me here>." The problem with this is that it is incoherent as I've tried to point out. If our identities are so fluid that anyone can assert any identity they wish and everyone else is obliged to simply go with it out of a misguided sense of 'respect' then we have no basis for claiming that Rush Limbaugh has no business critiquing this or that aspect of black American life--unless we're going to just drop all pretense to fairness and admit that identity is fluid and self-claiming unless, of course, the person claiming an identity is someone we dislike or disagree with or otherwise find disagreeable. If we're going to do that--and to take the strong form of 'your identity is what you say it is' you pretty much have to--then we should at least be willing to be honest that our position is just as bigoted as that which we rail against with all justification. Anything else pretty much falls apart of its own weight.

The second problem with identity politics is that it invites us to engage in oppression Olympics. By that I mean that if Heart and I disagree whichever one of us hits the "you're being oppressive" button fastest wins the argument. For not-entirely-bad reasons, four or five decades ago, the idea was put forth that if a white man and a black man were talking about race in America, fair-minded listeners could prove their fair-mindedness by giving more weight to the black man than the white man. The downside--the unintended consequence--is that now whichever speaker gets to "you're the oppressor" first wins the argument. It doesn't matter if their actual argument is so full of holes that Swiss cheese looks like a block of granite in comparison, if I get there first then you lose. So even in this discussion, we see a jockeying to determine which group is being oppressed. We are all so concerned about being labeled the oppressor that we--as a community--have avoided conversations that, quite honestly, have needed to be brought out into the open for the better part of a decade.

A number of lesbians--on a site named Butch Femme Planet, mind you--have expressed feeling like outsiders or strangers in their own community. When a butch lesbian, on a site ostensibly about building community around butch and femme identity--feels like an outsider or a stranger in her own land, then we should all probably stop and take notice. It means that somehow, in some way, something has gone terribly, terribly wrong. Like some other women-identified butches have expressed, I feel like a stranger in my own land. As I've put it to my wife on a number of occasions, I feel like woman-identified butches are viewed as children of a lesser goddess. Yet to say so is to invite accusations of transphobia--even though such an accusation would be, in my case, patently ludicrous.

I do not have a solution for this, I'm simply trying to point out the uncomfortable dynamics at work.

Cheers
Aj

[CherylNYC]

Being a Lesbian has always been pretty confusing for those of us who do not fit the stereotype.

I would say the same thing for Femme. I am expected to be a certain way and can't live up to all that.

I want to reclaim Lesbian proudly, but Lesbians have never really claimed me, unless I was sleeping with them.

Have I only ever slept with Lesbian identified Women? No.

Do I like pussy? Oh Yeah!!!

Do I fit all the stereotypes? No.

Whats funny is with my straight friends I would say "Hell yeah I am a Lesbian! Out and Proud". Here? I get confused. I have so many things inside me and who I am attracted to is ever evolving. I don't want to feel like I need to be a certain way to be accepted.

There are stereotypes about every ethnic, racial, cultural and sexual ID. Most are untrue, and some of those stereotypes exist in opposition to other, equally well known stereotypes. For instance, Jewish people have often been stereotyped as cheap skinflints. Conversely, Jewish people are also stereotyped as giving large sums of money to causes important to them. Are either or neither of these things true? Are either of these stereotypes more true of Jews than of any other minority? Most importantly, do Jews regularly disavow their heritage if they don't fit into known stereotypes?

Why is it so easy for us to say, 'Well I/she/they can't be lesbian because I/she/they don't wear flannel and Birkenstocks/hate men/ride a motorcycle to the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival, etc.? (Full disclosure- I've never owned Birkenstocks, but I have once ridden my motorcycle to Mich-fest. It was the year that the Seps tried to oust the Leatherdykes, but that's another post.) Why do we allow others to define this essential part of who we are based on a collection of stereotypes which may or may not be outdated and irrelevant? Is there some perfect andro-lesbian with an, ummm, magic wand, running around conferring twoo lesbian status on the anointed few who fit every stereotype?

Of the lesbians in my circles who are not b-f or leatherdykes, each and every one of them still fail to conform to the perfect lesbian stereotype in at least one way. Do they also have to question whether they're a twoo lesbian? And why do we care whether or not another lesbian thinks we're lesbian enough anyway?

Why are we, seemingly alone amongst all the other minorities, so ready to throw each other and ourselves out of the lesbian club? These questions have been bothering me for the 28 or more years that I've been an out lesbian.

[dreadgeek]

i have seen that too. Or about any issue around women. It was not my intent to shut down discussion of lesbian identity or to divert it to a discussion of transphobia. i probably could have made all my points without saying that. i am sure it is part of the mix of motivations for some folks who use this rhetoric because it is explicitly said. Not here. i agree with you.

i am not saying that there aren't many other reasons to experience lesbian ID as challenged. i hate defending myself, but on the dash site, i spent a lot of time and energy trying to end the lesbian bashing that was tolerated for so long there.

In any case, i agree with the moderators that parsing this out is probably the work of another thread.

Re the assumption of lesbian = woman loving woman, i gotta say that on this site, that IS excluding folk. i guess we know that.

So, if lesbian does not mean 'woman loving woman' then what does lesbian mean? Does lesbian include an FTM who loves women? Does it include a cisgendered male who loves women? If the term includes the former then why does the term not include the latter? Does it include a cross-dressing man who 'feels like a woman' when convenient but keeps his heterosexual male identity for career purposes? Does it include a homophobic cisgendered heterosexual man who says "I'm a lesbian, we both love women, yuk yuk"? If not, why does it include the FTM but not any of the cisgendered men?

I fear that this construction points us toward "well, if I like what you stand for then your identity is what you say it is but if I don't like what you stand for then your identity isn't what you say it is". It might just be me but I think that kind of stance lives in the same ethical neighborhood as plain old-fashions, down-home bigotry.

Cheers
Aj

[Apocalipstic]

I don't think anyone here fits any particular stereotype nor do I think one needs to fit them in order to have a place within a community. I don't fit the stereotype of either a lesbian or a black lesbian. Yet, I claim lesbian as part of my identity. This discussion illustrates the problem with identity politics. In fact, it illustrates both problems with IdPol and why I would love to see the queer community abandon it. the first problem is that identity politics, whatever utility it might have, is an invitation to a kind of hair-splitting, micro-parsing of language that obfuscates more than it illuminates. What I'm seeing happen now is that *because* identity has been used to exclude, we've decided that now identity (labels) are the problem. The issue, of course, is that we don't really abandon labels or qualifying our views based upon this or that sociological category. So in pursuit of not being boxed in by labels we've gone the other direction. It's not just 'lesbian doesn't encompass me' (if that is the stance one is taking) but "as a fat-positive, female-identified, black, butch geekgirl, I find labels restricting so I reject <insert label I've decided I don't want applied to me here>." The problem with this is that it is incoherent as I've tried to point out. If our identities are so fluid that anyone can assert any identity they wish and everyone else is obliged to simply go with it out of a misguided sense of 'respect' then we have no basis for claiming that Rush Limbaugh has no business critiquing this or that aspect of black American life--unless we're going to just drop all pretense to fairness and admit that identity is fluid and self-claiming unless, of course, the person claiming an identity is someone we dislike or disagree with or otherwise find disagreeable. If we're going to do that--and to take the strong form of 'your identity is what you say it is' you pretty much have to--then we should at least be willing to be honest that our position is just as bigoted as that which we rail against with all justification. Anything else pretty much falls apart of its own weight.

The second problem with identity politics is that it invites us to engage in oppression Olympics. By that I mean that if Heart and I disagree whichever one of us hits the "you're being oppressive" button fastest wins the argument. For not-entirely-bad reasons, four or five decades ago, the idea was put forth that if a white man and a black man were talking about race in America, fair-minded listeners could prove their fair-mindedness by giving more weight to the black man than the white man. The downside--the unintended consequence--is that now whichever speaker gets to "you're the oppressor" first wins the argument. It doesn't matter if their actual argument is so full of holes that Swiss cheese looks like a block of granite in comparison, if I get there first then you lose. So even in this discussion, we see a jockeying to determine which group is being oppressed. We are all so concerned about being labeled the oppressor that we--as a community--have avoided conversations that, quite honestly, have needed to be brought out into the open for the better part of a decade.

A number of lesbians--on a site named Butch Femme Planet, mind you--have expressed feeling like outsiders or strangers in their own community. When a butch lesbian, on a site ostensibly about building community around butch and femme identity--feels like an outsider or a stranger in her own land, then we should all probably stop and take notice. It means that somehow, in some way, something has gone terribly, terribly wrong. Like some other women-identified butches have expressed, I feel like a stranger in my own land. As I've put it to my wife on a number of occasions, I feel like woman-identified butches are viewed as children of a lesser goddess. Yet to say so is to invite accusations of transphobia--even though such an accusation would be, in my case, patently ludicrous.

I do not have a solution for this, I'm simply trying to point out the uncomfortable dynamics at work.

Cheers
Aj

Thank you for answering. I get what you are saying.

Maybe having these discussions makes us feel left out. For myself, maybe I am a bit bitter from all the discussions and expectations over the years.

My question here is....why are we only upset that Butch Lesbians don't feel accepted of like they have a place? I agree 100% its been a problem for a long time (maybe always) and I am not trying to play Opression Olympics.

I want to feel proud.

[Apocalipstic]

There are stereotypes about every ethnic, racial, cultural and sexual ID. Most are untrue, and some of those stereotypes exist in opposition to other, equally well known stereotypes. For instance, Jewish people have often been stereotyped as cheap skinflints. Conversely, Jewish people are also stereotyped as giving large sums of money to causes important to them. Are either or neither of these things true? Are either of these stereotypes more true of Jews than of any other minority? Most importantly, do Jews regularly disavow their heritage if they don't fit into known stereotypes?

Why is it so easy for us to say, 'Well I/she/they can't be lesbian because I/she/they don't wear flannel and Birkenstocks/hate men/ride a motorcycle to the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival, etc.? (Full disclosure- I've never owned Birkenstocks, but I have once ridden my motorcycle to Mich-fest. It was the year that the Seps tried to oust the Leatherdykes, but that's another post.) Why do we allow others to define this essential part of who we are based on a collection of stereotypes which may or may not be outdated and irrelevant? Is there some perfect andro-lesbian with an, ummm, magic wand, running around conferring twoo lesbian status on the anointed few who fit every stereotype?

Of the lesbians in my circles who are not b-f or leatherdykes, each and every one of them still fail to conform to the perfect lesbian stereotype in at least one way. Do they also have to question whether they're a twoo lesbian? And why do we care whether or not another lesbian thinks we're lesbian enough anyway?

Why are we, seemingly alone amongst all the other minorities, so ready to throw each other and ourselves out of the lesbian club? These questions have been bothering me for the 28 or more years that I've been an out lesbian.

Point taken :)!!!

I have never fit in and its dumb that I expect to now.

Am I a Lesbian yes. Am I proud I love Women? Hell yes!

ps. I am confused about what we are and are not supposed to be discussing here, so if this is not it it is because I am confused.

[BullDog]

There are a number of lesbians here in this community who date and partner with males/male identified people. As far as I know they all identify as women.

Recently there were a couple of cases of men masquerading as lesbians, running online blogs. That really outraged me. To me that is appropriation.

Those two scenarios aren't even remotely the same. I get that there is the danger of appropriation but I don't think that was what anyone was talking about earlier- where lesbian means anything or can be appropriated and that no one cares.

As a butch lesbian I most certainly have felt like a stranger and as a woman identified butch as a child of a lesser god in BF commnities. However, it is also true that this is a mixed gender community and that different gender identities have relationships with both the identity of lesbian as well as real world life experience with lesbian communities.

I am a woman. Yes that's important for me to talk about in the Lesbian Zone, but I am also taking into account the social context of the community here.

[dreadgeek]

Thank you for answering. I get what you are saying.

Maybe having these discussions makes us feel left out. For myself, maybe I am a bit bitter from all the discussions and expectations over the years.

My question here is....why are we only upset that Butch Lesbians don't feel accepted of like they have a place? I agree 100% its been a problem for a long time (maybe always) and I am not trying to play Opression Olympics.

I want to feel proud.

I don't think we're only upset about it when butch lesbians don't feel accepted or have a place. I think that it is a point of discussion *here* because I think that butch lesbians are the canaries in the lesbian coalmine. The issue is focusing on lesbians and lesbian identity because one would think that on a butch-femme site lesbians would at least feel welcome and not feel like interlopers.

Cheers
Aj

[BullDog]

One other quick thought on the issue of appropriation. I think lesbian is still often quite the dirty word in BF circles so I don't see those who don't really identify as one wanting to appropriate it. I don't see that as a real problem. Maybe I am missing something.

[Apocalipstic]

I don't think we're only upset about it when butch lesbians don't feel accepted or have a place. I think that it is a point of discussion *here* because I think that butch lesbians are the canaries in the lesbian coalmine. The issue is focusing on lesbians and lesbian identity because one would think that on a butch-femme site lesbians would at least feel welcome and not feel like interlopers.

Cheers
Aj

Laugh....yes, one would think that...but it continues to be an issue for all of us!

It has always been a shock to me that being a Butch or Femme Lesbian is so out on the lunatic fringe.

I need to really work on reclaiming my joy. :)

[Apocalipstic]

One other quick thought on the issue of appropriation. I think lesbian is still often quite the dirty word in BF circles so I don't see those who don't really identify as one wanting to appropriate it. I don't see that as a real problem. Maybe I am missing something.

Is Dis-appropriating a word? :sunglass:

[Medusa]

One other quick thought on the issue of appropriation. I think lesbian is still often quite the dirty word in BF circles so I don't see those who don't really identify as one wanting to appropriate it. I don't see that as a real problem. Maybe I am missing something.

Yes! Way back when I joined the Dash site in 1999 I remember a discussion that went on for several weeks about how the Butch/Femme dance and "Lesbianism" were 2 different things based on our brand of power exchange.

I don't think it's so far out in space that there has existed a historical rift in the identity politics of Lesbians and people who only identify as Butch or Femme. Given the history of how some Butches and Femmes have felt marginalized in Lesbian communities, I can see why some folks would shrug off a Lesbian identity.

In my head, Lesbians are women who fuck and are attracted to other women. Sometimes it's also a political identity that has nothing to do with sex but mostly does encompass attraction between women. In my head, it is redundant on a Butch/Femme website to have a "Lesbian" zone unless that Lesbian zone is being parsed out for politics sake. I have said multiple times, this entire website is a Lesbian zone.

I get the desire for women to have space that is women-oriented. I get the desire to have space that is specifically designed to house Lesbian issues. I support that!

I think that Butch/Femme identity politics have evolved over the years and we are a decidedly more Queer space than we were back in the 50's. I don't think that's a bad thing. I also don't think it's a bad thing to keep hold of that sacred space for women-centric, women-defined, women-governed space. (not only "not a bad thing" but deeply necessary)

[Heart]

Any suggestions on how those of us who are older and have never been accepted by the Lesbian community (though we definitely qualify, but don't look like we do) can find community and regain our sense of Pride?

I'm older and other than a few dopes, I have never felt unaccepted by the lesbian community at large. Granted, I was not out as a femme until 2000, and I'm in NY, a pretty diverse queer community.

I don't experience some big monolithic lesbian community from which I am excluded, nor do I have expectations about how I should be embraced. Apoc - you asked how those who do not "fit the stereotype" can be accepted... but perhaps your belief in a lesbian stereotype is part of the problem... are you excluding yourself? Are you allowing the dictates of a few to determine your space? Or your pride?

But if we want to play this out -- what I see as the stumbling block in the decades-long struggles within lesbian/queer women's communities about who belongs/who doesn't, what the criteria is, who get's marginalized, etc is... (I bet you can guess what I'm going to say)... the reality of institutionalized patriarchy and the internalized sexism and misogyny that results among women. Lesbians, as women who were visibly violating the patriarchy were marginalized. They banded together, closing ranks against patriarchal (read male) influence and control. That was a necessary reaction to patriarchy - being outlaws means being clear about who is safe and who isn't. The internalized part is where those lesbians were suspicious of other lesbians who appeared to embody anything they deemed patriarchal - like any amount of femininity, or too much masculinity, or penetrative sex, for example.

We've come quite a distance from some of these limitations, but it's like a rubber-band -- it stretches, then snaps back, then stretches again. The thing that concerns me is when we fight each other at the expense of fighting patriarchy, sexism, misogyny, racism, classism, etc. This brings us full circle to the issue of diversity, solidarity, allyship, building bridges, and inclusivity. My biggest concern about what happened in the BV organization is that they deleted "feminism" from their mission statement. In no way can any queer organization speak for lesbians, butch women, women of color, transwomen or any women if they are not clear about their feminist principles.

I'm rambling... and I realize I'm off the topic of lesbian pride...

Heart

[OS Butch]

Some people regard the term female = sex and woman = gender.

There are definitely butches who define as female, but not as women. I defined that way for many years and know quite a many butch who still does. Here the term woman is seen as being connected to a social construct, rather than it being connected to one's biology.

(Hope you were actually asking the question?)

I was actually asking. Thanks for responding. For me, I am both, female, woman and Butch to boot! What a deal I am!

LOL! I looked at what I said that someone thanked me..... I suppose I should have written I am all 3, Female, Woman and Butch to boot! What a deal I am!
Seems I left something else out, I am a Lesbian too!

[nycfem]

And you are a most talented stained glass craftswoman!!!




LOL! I looked at what I said that someone thanked me..... I suppose I should have written I am all 3, Female, Woman and Butch to boot! What a deal I am!
Seems I left something else out, I am a Lesbian too!

[OS Butch]

And you are a most talented stained glass craftswoman!!!

Awwww shucks. Thank you sweetie. See you in October:)

[AtLast]

I am very proud to be a lesbian. I am also proud of the expansion of queer as a concept that includes lesbianism as one cog on a wheel of great fortune in human development and personal expression.

[Toughy]

Lesbian is not my favorite word, although I am starting to like it a whole bunch more due to recent events. I always preferred dyke. I got lottsa words I resonate with:

butch dyke woman femininst pervert asshat woman-loving-woman lesbian fucker fuckee queer.........I live all those words......and I am proud to be all those words in any and all combinations. The most recent ones.....crone, elder kind of make me cringe, but I am 59 so I better get used to it ..........laughin....

[princessbelle]

I have also not used the word lesbian in years. I'm not exposed to too much where i live and what i ascertain is what i read or see on TV. I backed away from the word after i decided i didn't fit into what i was understanding how the word was being defined for me.

I shouldn't have felt that way. As most are saying here and in other threads, it is personal and there isn't a clear cut definition like i thought there was.

I agree with Toughy, due to recent events, it is now a word i am beginning to resonate to ...again.

It's good to be coming home. Lesbian pride IS a beautiful thing.

[ScandalAndy]

Thank you for your insightful response, Kobi.

I have some thoughts about this which I want to stew on a bit more before I let out, but one in particular is overwhelming me.


Pride. I've noticed in my own circles that it has become particularly passe to stand up to people. If someone says something you don't agree with you just respond with "ok whatever" and go on your merry way. I have rarely seen someone stand up and say "no, I am proud to be who i am, and this is why". There is quite a bit of fear surrounding acceptance and I think individuals are less likely to express pride in something if they feel it will alienate them from their chosen support group or social circle. This may be yet another folly of youth, which I am unfortunately subject to all too frequently, but the revelation is stunning to me this morning. This is something I will keep in the back of my mind and tumble around until it is a smooth, shiny concept. I do not want to be a "go with the flow" girl at the expense of my beliefs, no matter how many "friends" I lose.

Do you think it's an affliction of the younger generations to detest conflict so much that they avoid defending their beliefs? To me this seems VERY different from the approach taken by community members who are older than myself. Am I mistaken in this?



Interesting question. I have an initial response that might grow as I think on it more.

I think there are many ways to do this. For me, it is a multi pronged approach.

The first, is reclaiming the word lesbian for myself. I am a lesbian. I used to use qualifiers and combine terms. Not any more. How can anyone relate to lesbian if we no longer use the word or we qualify it to death? Using it gives visibility that it is still alive and well and perking right along despite what others would prefer to think.

The second, is speaking to those issues surrounding lesbianism. It is speaking up when lesbian is equated with something passe, outdated, not good enough, and all the other negaters that have been mentioned in this thread. It is reclaiming our voice, our power, and our right to be.

The third, is starting threads like this in a zone meant for us. Young folk and newbies need to see lesbians are present and accounted for. They also need to see that we, as lesbians, have similar and dissimilar issues with others under the queer umbrella. They need to see we, as lesbians, can work in concert with other queers on issues we have in common, and we can forge ahead on our own to address those issues which affect us alone.

The fourth, remembering what youth entails i.e. a time to explore and experience, try stuff on, individuals deciding what works and doesnt work for them. As someone who was raised when homosexuality was still a psychistric diagnosis, I am all for taking advantage of the freedoms and options available today! But, all us queers, still need to accept some responsibility for being available to youth who may need us to be there and be visible. We didnt evolve in a vacuum. Neither will they.

[Apocalipstic]

I'm older and other than a few dopes, I have never felt unaccepted by the lesbian community at large. Granted, I was not out as a femme until 2000, and I'm in NY, a pretty diverse queer community.

I don't experience some big monolithic lesbian community from which I am excluded, nor do I have expectations about how I should be embraced. Apoc - you asked how those who do not "fit the stereotype" can be accepted... but perhaps your belief in a lesbian stereotype is part of the problem... are you excluding yourself? Are you allowing the dictates of a few to determine your space? Or your pride?

But if we want to play this out -- what I see as the stumbling block in the decades-long struggles within lesbian/queer women's communities about who belongs/who doesn't, what the criteria is, who get's marginalized, etc is... (I bet you can guess what I'm going to say)... the reality of institutionalized patriarchy and the internalized sexism and misogyny that results among women. Lesbians, as women who were visibly violating the patriarchy were marginalized. They banded together, closing ranks against patriarchal (read male) influence and control. That was a necessary reaction to patriarchy - being outlaws means being clear about who is safe and who isn't. The internalized part is where those lesbians were suspicious of other lesbians who appeared to embody anything they deemed patriarchal - like any amount of femininity, or too much masculinity, or penetrative sex, for example.

We've come quite a distance from some of these limitations, but it's like a rubber-band -- it stretches, then snaps back, then stretches again. The thing that concerns me is when we fight each other at the expense of fighting patriarchy, sexism, misogyny, racism, classism, etc. This brings us full circle to the issue of diversity, solidarity, allyship, building bridges, and inclusivity. My biggest concern about what happened in the BV organization is that they deleted "feminism" from their mission statement. In no way can any queer organization speak for lesbians, butch women, women of color, transwomen or any women if they are not clear about their feminist principles.

I'm rambling... and I realize I'm off the topic of lesbian pride...

Heart

I love it when you talk about the Patriarchy! :)

Yes, I likely have been buying into the stereotype and maybe I need to get out more. I need to let the past go and focus on today.

Thank you for your insightful response, Kobi.

I have some thoughts about this which I want to stew on a bit more before I let out, but one in particular is overwhelming me.


Pride. I've noticed in my own circles that it has become particularly passe to stand up to people. If someone says something you don't agree with you just respond with "ok whatever" and go on your merry way. I have rarely seen someone stand up and say "no, I am proud to be who i am, and this is why". There is quite a bit of fear surrounding acceptance and I think individuals are less likely to express pride in something if they feel it will alienate them from their chosen support group or social circle. This may be yet another folly of youth, which I am unfortunately subject to all too frequently, but the revelation is stunning to me this morning. This is something I will keep in the back of my mind and tumble around until it is a smooth, shiny concept. I do not want to be a "go with the flow" girl at the expense of my beliefs, no matter how many "friends" I lose.

Do you think it's an affliction of the younger generations to detest conflict so much that they avoid defending their beliefs? To me this seems VERY different from the approach taken by community members who are older than myself. Am I mistaken in this?

I've been thinking about this passivity too. I think its larger than just young people.

I wonder if social media gives us more connectivity to people we might not otherwise hang with is making us less confrontational? More like we need to not upset anyone.

20 years ago I wanted to be a lesbian Separatist (until I was told no blowdryers and tweezers were allowed :|) and now I am having to dig deep to say I am proud of even being a Lesbian.

[christie]

Do you think it's an affliction of the younger generations to detest conflict so much that they avoid defending their beliefs? To me this seems VERY different from the approach taken by community members who are older than myself. Am I mistaken in this?

Andy -

I snipped your post for brevity -

I DON'T think you are mistaken in your observations of younger generations, but I don't think that its primarily an affliction of LBGTQI youth. I believe its an affliction of youth, period.

We have a 17 (almost 18) year old son who graduated from high school in the spring. I am stunned and disappointed on a daily basis at just how apathetic he is about most things in life. Only rarely do we see him passionately engaged about his beliefs - and I think that part of it is that he is still figuring out what his beliefs are. He has been the instigator at our attending the NOM counter-rally in DC last year. He stood up for a young lady at his school on "purple day" in the midst of a buncha redneck, conservative boys. He has been open with his friends about having "gay moms" and made a point to include Jess as a parent listing in the local newspaper senior edition.

It does bother me that the only thing I have really seen him passionate/engaged about are equal rights and I often wonder if its a direct result of Jess and I having conversations that include him. I wonder if we are failing as parents to expose him to other issues so that he can further explore and define his belief system. It also bothers me that what was important to me at his age is SO far removed from what is important to me now.

I am derailing myself, but to me, you brought up a very valid point about the apathy of youth and I do think that its a very lesbian issue to me as I parent as a lesbian. Perhaps its better in a parenting forum. *shrugs*

[Jess]

20 years ago I wanted to be a lesbian Separatist (until I was told no blowdryers and tweezers were allowed :|) and now I am having to dig deep to say I am proud of even being a Lesbian.

In my early to mid twenties, I too, considered separatism as a lifestyle. I too, have gone through years of trying to figure out all of the nuances and politics involved in being a woman who loves women. I too, struggled with the arguments/dissonance of inclusivity and exclusivity surrounding and muddying our communities, as well as forcing us to grow. Guess in this way, butch and femme lesbians are not so different.

I am one who does still use the definition of "lesbian" as a woman who loves/ has sex with women". I truly do feel that anything else is an ally. While I consider that yes, as Lesbians we created a sub-culture within the larger culture of homosexuals, that "culture" is truly "ours". Those folks who find kinship with us are our allies. Because they may be totally in-tune with lesbian music/ art/ literature, does not make them lesbians. These cultural products came out of OUR struggles and OUR celebrations. Feel free to honor them, but do not feel free to appropriate them.

I totally agree with previous posters who have stated the fact that because I choose to define myself this way (in its limited definition) does not mean that I have to oppose other identities. I can be and am supportive of the struggles legal and emotional of other identities. It also does not mean I have to limit my view of what lesbian looks like.

I am a woman ( who happens to have many masculine traits). Even my way of fucking is masculine ( I am told). Does that make me not a lesbian? Does that make me less of a female/ woman? No, it doesn't. I am still a woman in all of my pain and glory and I do still claim lesbian and do still carry that badge with pride. I have never claimed queer ( other than an umbrella term) as for ME, to be queer would be me fucking other butches. I don't know if that makes sense to anyone but me. Now, this is not me knocking butch-butch or (any other sexual proclivity). What it means is for ME, as a lesbian, it would be queer( weird/odd) for me to have that attraction. If I did, I would proudly don the queer mantle! If I fucked men, I would proudly claim heterosexual. If I fucked men and women, I would proudly claim bi-sexual. This is just how I see it.

As a woman, I will NOT be told how to dress, how to behave, how to fuck. EVER. As a lesbian, I will wear a huge cock ( or not), I will fuck with passion, I will wear a hat and boots and drive a big ugly truck, I will write poetry and watch the sun fill our skies with soft pastels. I will build a shed, renovate my home, tend our garden, wash our laundry, fuss over wonderful fabrics and spoil our fur babies. I will help raise our son to hopefully be aware of feminism and help our neighbors.

I am happy to see this topic coming up and happier still to see us beginning to own our pride, in whatever identity we fall into. To say "lesbian" is passe is like saying watermelon is passe. It is still here, alive and well even though some folks prefer cantaloupe or honeydew or mangoes.

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRDdSmzuessOrIhOShq2kP_E6Wd-ja7T969ysDBqkkl4bfMHCWX

[Kobi]

Thank you for your insightful response, Kobi.

I have some thoughts about this which I want to stew on a bit more before I let out, but one in particular is overwhelming me.


Pride. I've noticed in my own circles that it has become particularly passe to stand up to people. If someone says something you don't agree with you just respond with "ok whatever" and go on your merry way. I have rarely seen someone stand up and say "no, I am proud to be who i am, and this is why". There is quite a bit of fear surrounding acceptance and I think individuals are less likely to express pride in something if they feel it will alienate them from their chosen support group or social circle. This may be yet another folly of youth, which I am unfortunately subject to all too frequently, but the revelation is stunning to me this morning. This is something I will keep in the back of my mind and tumble around until it is a smooth, shiny concept. I do not want to be a "go with the flow" girl at the expense of my beliefs, no matter how many "friends" I lose.

Do you think it's an affliction of the younger generations to detest conflict so much that they avoid defending their beliefs? To me this seems VERY different from the approach taken by community members who are older than myself. Am I mistaken in this?



Scandal Andy,

I probably have more questions here than anything concrete to offer.

What do you mean by standing up to people is passe? Bring them here, we'll whip them into shape in no time:)

What does "ok whatever" signify to you? Is it an ok I hear you, or ok I respect your right to think that way, or more of an ok whatever dismissal kind of thing?

Are you asking if peer pressure affects only the young? In case you are, reread this thread with a different set of eyes :).

I am not a parent, nor do I have the opportunity to be involved in young peoples lives on a daily basis. It is hard for me to equate what seemed normal to me as a kid and what is the norm today.

I grew up in an era of being surrounded by protests and movements - gay rights, women's rights, civil rights, gray panthers, Black Panthers, the Vietnam War, abortion rights and probably a bunch I forgot. There were profound changes going on that impacted, in one way or another on everyday life in big ways. (And I wonder why I am tired?)

This stuff spoken to me. It reasonated somewhere deep inside of me. Did my peers have the same kind of cathartic experience with it? No. Did they have the need to address things as I did? No. Did they stand up for themselves or others on a regular basis? No.

I was more social cause oriented. My peers, for the most part, were more social life oriented.

Is it different today?

[dreadgeek]

I've been thinking about this passivity too. I think its larger than just young people.

I wonder if social media gives us more connectivity to people we might not otherwise hang with is making us less confrontational? More like we need to not upset anyone.

I think that is some of it. Some of it, though, is a couple of memes that work to stifle the habit of discussion. One is the idea that if you disagree with me you are being *intolerant*. Since very few people want to be intolerant or thought of as being intolerant, they simply avoid disagreeing with others since to disagree with someone is thought to be prima facie evidence of not having an open mind. Another is the idea that we all have our own 'truth' or 'reality'. While this is ostensibly supposed to be the gateway to tolerance it is more appropriately the entrance to apathy. Why should I care if you espouse something anti-feminist if that is your 'truth' and my truth is something else? Just as well for me to ignore what you say and blithely go along pretending as if ideas don't have consequences.


Thank you for your insightful response, Kobi.

I have some thoughts about this which I want to stew on a bit more before I let out, but one in particular is overwhelming me.


Pride. I've noticed in my own circles that it has become particularly passe to stand up to people. If someone says something you don't agree with you just respond with "ok whatever" and go on your merry way. I have rarely seen someone stand up and say "no, I am proud to be who i am, and this is why". There is quite a bit of fear surrounding acceptance and I think individuals are less likely to express pride in something if they feel it will alienate them from their chosen support group or social circle. This may be yet another folly of youth, which I am unfortunately subject to all too frequently, but the revelation is stunning to me this morning. This is something I will keep in the back of my mind and tumble around until it is a smooth, shiny concept. I do not want to be a "go with the flow" girl at the expense of my beliefs, no matter how many "friends" I lose.

Do you think it's an affliction of the younger generations to detest conflict so much that they avoid defending their beliefs? To me this seems VERY different from the approach taken by community members who are older than myself. Am I mistaken in this?

I think this is a widespread syndrome much broader than just the youth of our community. That said, I think that it is more pronounced because while most of us over 40 were raised with *some* variation on the theme of 'there are good ideas and bad ideas, there are right ideas and wrong ideas...' it seems that the meme that there are only ideas and no idea is generically preferable to another idea has become pervasive. I notice it in the difference between the how my parent's generation spoke of civil rights and how we speak of our own civil rights struggle. Only now, in the last four or five years, has the queer movement even begun toying with the idea that we are, in fact, engaged in a moral battle and that our opponents are on the wrong side of it. If one actually reads the writings of the civil rights legends, however, one does not see the kind of equivocation one sees today. MLK Jr. never, as far as I am aware, gave even the smallest quarter to the idea that segregationists might have a point nor did he dismiss them as mere assholes. Instead, they were wrong, blacks and our allies were right, and it was just a matter of getting the majority to realize that segregation was a moral evil--not a merely undesirable condition but an actual moral evil.


I'm older and other than a few dopes, I have never felt unaccepted by the lesbian community at large. Granted, I was not out as a femme until 2000, and I'm in NY, a pretty diverse queer community.

I don't experience some big monolithic lesbian community from which I am excluded, nor do I have expectations about how I should be embraced. Apoc - you asked how those who do not "fit the stereotype" can be accepted... but perhaps your belief in a lesbian stereotype is part of the problem... are you excluding yourself? Are you allowing the dictates of a few to determine your space? Or your pride?

This is a great point, Heart. When I came out as queer, other blacks used my queerness as evidence that my black identity (and therefore any claim I might have to blackness or black pride) was irrefutably broken. Now, it was already tenuous because I was never particularly 'street' and I certainly don't sound like I'm from the 'hood but coming out as queer was the final straw. Black people are not 'supposed' to be queer so if you are queer you have abandoned blackness. That was (and still is) the argument. For a while, I let that get in my head but then I came to my senses and realized that my blackness is not subject to other's dictates and that before I am either black or queer I am a *person*. We cannot afford to let others get in our heads and tell us that because we do not fit this or that stereotype that some person has determined is the signature trait of some group that we cannot claim membership of that group. That way madness truly lies.




We've come quite a distance from some of these limitations, but it's like a rubber-band -- it stretches, then snaps back, then stretches again. The thing that concerns me is when we fight each other at the expense of fighting patriarchy, sexism, misogyny, racism, classism, etc. This brings us full circle to the issue of diversity, solidarity, allyship, building bridges, and inclusivity. My biggest concern about what happened in the BV organization is that they deleted "feminism" from their mission statement. In no way can any queer organization speak for lesbians, butch women, women of color, transwomen or any women if they are not clear about their feminist principles.

I'm rambling... and I realize I'm off the topic of lesbian pride...

Heart

I don't know that you're too far off the topic, Heart. I think that feminism is non-optional for any queer movement worthy of supporting. Any queer movement, meme or ideology that turns its back on feminist principles should be suspect. By feminist principle, I mean something very simple--to me, feminism at base has one stance "women are people, for better or worse, they are first and foremost human beings" and one basic question "does this help women". If the meme does not treat women as people, then it is not feminist. If it does not have as one of its goals uplifting and empowering women or, at the very worst not doing any harm, then it does not deserve to be called feminist. The erasure of women is one of the reasons I had to pull back from BV. I wonder if some of why lesbian has become so problematic is that lesbian is definitively pro-woman. To me, lesbian and feminist go together in much the same way that life and water go together.

Cheers
Aj

[ScandalAndy]

Scandal Andy,

I probably have more questions here than anything concrete to offer.

What do you mean by standing up to people is passe? Bring them here, we'll whip them into shape in no time:)

What I meant by that is that standing up to someone or choosing to staunchly disagree is often viewed as "being dramatic" or stirring up drama. If you are disagreeable, you're a drama queen and nobody wants to deal with that. I enjoy these forums because I feel that healthy debate is encouraged.

What does "ok whatever" signify to you? Is it an ok I hear you, or ok I respect your right to think that way, or more of an ok whatever dismissal kind of thing?

To me, it's a dismissal, as in "I don't want to get into it with you, so i am going to leave before things get ugly".

Are you asking if peer pressure affects only the young? In case you are, reread this thread with a different set of eyes :).

No, I believe peer pressure is a constant, whether we choose to go along with it or not. What I was asking is whether my observation was on point when I said that older community members are less apt to give a damn what others think of them, and more likely to be confident in their beliefs without requiring the validation of others.

I am not a parent, nor do I have the opportunity to be involved in young peoples lives on a daily basis. It is hard for me to equate what seemed normal to me as a kid and what is the norm today. i cannot speak to this particular experience either

I grew up in an era of being surrounded by protests and movements - gay rights, women's rights, civil rights, gray panthers, Black Panthers, the Vietnam War, abortion rights and probably a bunch I forgot. There were profound changes going on that impacted, in one way or another on everyday life in big ways. (And I wonder why I am tired?) I did not grow up in a political household. I think it would be interesting to try and figure out where my activist drive comes from, in another thread of course. :)

This stuff spoken to me. It reasonated somewhere deep inside of me. Did my peers have the same kind of cathartic experience with it? No. Did they have the need to address things as I did? No. Did they stand up for themselves or others on a regular basis? No.

I was more social cause oriented. My peers, for the most part, were more social life oriented.

Is it different today?




Maybe it's this current culture of social media and the speed at which we are exposed to, process, then disregard various stimuli throughout our day, but I see fewer and fewer individuals stopping to think and truly ask themselves "is what is going on here okay? Is this hurtful to anyone?". There's a lot self-centered behavior reinforcing the "if it isn't happening to me, then I don't care" mentality. Maybe it's a side effect of geographic location or age demographic, it could be anything at all, I'm just not sure.

I think that is some of it. Some of it, though, is a couple of memes that work to stifle the habit of discussion. One is the idea that if you disagree with me you are being *intolerant*. Since very few people want to be intolerant or thought of as being intolerant, they simply avoid disagreeing with others since to disagree with someone is thought to be prima facie evidence of not having an open mind. Another is the idea that we all have our own 'truth' or 'reality'. While this is ostensibly supposed to be the gateway to tolerance it is more appropriately the entrance to apathy. Why should I care if you espouse something anti-feminist if that is your 'truth' and my truth is something else? Just as well for me to ignore what you say and blithely go along pretending as if ideas don't have consequences.




I think this is a widespread syndrome much broader than just the youth of our community. That said, I think that it is more pronounced because while most of us over 40 were raised with *some* variation on the theme of 'there are good ideas and bad ideas, there are right ideas and wrong ideas...' it seems that the meme that there are only ideas and no idea is generically preferable to another idea has become pervasive. I notice it in the difference between the how my parent's generation spoke of civil rights and how we speak of our own civil rights struggle. Only now, in the last four or five years, has the queer movement even begun toying with the idea that we are, in fact, engaged in a moral battle and that our opponents are on the wrong side of it. If one actually reads the writings of the civil rights legends, however, one does not see the kind of equivocation one sees today. MLK Jr. never, as far as I am aware, gave even the smallest quarter to the idea that segregationists might have a point nor did he dismiss them as mere assholes. Instead, they were wrong, blacks and our allies were right, and it was just a matter of getting the majority to realize that segregation was a moral evil--not a merely undesirable condition but an actual moral evil.




This is a great point, Heart. When I came out as queer, other blacks used my queerness as evidence that my black identity (and therefore any claim I might have to blackness or black pride) was irrefutably broken. Now, it was already tenuous because I was never particularly 'street' and I certainly don't sound like I'm from the 'hood but coming out as queer was the final straw. Black people are not 'supposed' to be queer so if you are queer you have abandoned blackness. That was (and still is) the argument. For a while, I let that get in my head but then I came to my senses and realized that my blackness is not subject to other's dictates and that before I am either black or queer I am a *person*. We cannot afford to let others get in our heads and tell us that because we do not fit this or that stereotype that some person has determined is the signature trait of some group that we cannot claim membership of that group. That way madness truly lies.



I don't know that you're too far off the topic, Heart. I think that feminism is non-optional for any queer movement worthy of supporting. Any queer movement, meme or ideology that turns its back on feminist principles should be suspect. By feminist principle, I mean something very simple--to me, feminism at base has one stance "women are people, for better or worse, they are first and foremost human beings" and one basic question "does this help women". If the meme does not treat women as people, then it is not feminist. If it does not have as one of its goals uplifting and empowering women or, at the very worst not doing any harm, then it does not deserve to be called feminist. The erasure of women is one of the reasons I had to pull back from BV. I wonder if some of why lesbian has become so problematic is that lesbian is definitively pro-woman. To me, lesbian and feminist go together in much the same way that life and water go together.

Cheers
Aj


Aj, as usual, I'm intimidated and overjoyed when we get to put our brains together. :)

As I stated previously, I feel there is almost a revulsion attached to disagreement. The oft-repeated "no drama" statement makes me feel that any time someone disagrees, they are seen as being dramatic and are immediately ostracized or dismissed, invalidating their ability to be a contributor. I think there's a huge push to either convert said dissenter to one's own personal beliefs or, barring that, ignore them altogether. I'm not sure where this push toward homogeneity came from, but I think it is fueling the apathy we are seeing. Part of me wants to find out why this is happening, and another part of me desperately wants to figure out how to stop it.

[Heart]

I don't know that you're too far off the topic, Heart. I think that feminism is non-optional for any queer movement worthy of supporting. Any queer movement, meme or ideology that turns its back on feminist principles should be suspect. By feminist principle, I mean something very simple--to me, feminism at base has one stance "women are people, for better or worse, they are first and foremost human beings" and one basic question "does this help women". If the meme does not treat women as people, then it is not feminist. If it does not have as one of its goals uplifting and empowering women or, at the very worst not doing any harm, then it does not deserve to be called feminist. The erasure of women is one of the reasons I had to pull back from BV. I wonder if some of why lesbian has become so problematic is that lesbian is definitively pro-woman. To me, lesbian and feminist go together in much the same way that life and water go together.

Cheers
Aj

Right on AJ. But I will go further than doing no harm and further than empowerment. Articulating feminist principles today should have at least these specific grounding and intersecting principles: linking oppressions, dismantling patriarchy, and women in leadership positions.

[Apocalipstic]

This is such a great discussion.

I was younger I was way more actively pro-woman than I am not....to the point of being anti-man.

There has to be a balance. Things seem so extreme.

If Lesbian is not the term for women loving women, then is there a term? Does it make us less for wanting a term to describe ourselves?

[Kobi]

In my early to mid twenties, I too, considered separatism as a lifestyle. I too, have gone through years of trying to figure out all of the nuances and politics involved in being a woman who loves women. I too, struggled with the arguments/dissonance of inclusivity and exclusivity surrounding and muddying our communities, as well as forcing us to grow. Guess in this way, butch and femme lesbians are not so different.

I am one who does still use the definition of "lesbian" as a woman who loves/ has sex with women". I truly do feel that anything else is an ally. While I consider that yes, as Lesbians we created a sub-culture within the larger culture of homosexuals, that "culture" is truly "ours". Those folks who find kinship with us are our allies. Because they may be totally in-tune with lesbian music/ art/ literature, does not make them lesbians. These cultural products came out of OUR struggles and OUR celebrations. Feel free to honor them, but do not feel free to appropriate them.

I totally agree with previous posters who have stated the fact that because I choose to define myself this way (in its limited definition) does not mean that I have to oppose other identities. I can be and am supportive of the struggles legal and emotional of other identities. It also does not mean I have to limit my view of what lesbian looks like.

I am a woman ( who happens to have many masculine traits). Even my way of fucking is masculine ( I am told). Does that make me not a lesbian? Does that make me less of a female/ woman? No, it doesn't. I am still a woman in all of my pain and glory and I do still claim lesbian and do still carry that badge with pride. I have never claimed queer ( other than an umbrella term) as for ME, to be queer would be me fucking other butches. I don't know if that makes sense to anyone but me. Now, this is not me knocking butch-butch or (any other sexual proclivity). What it means is for ME, as a lesbian, it would be queer( weird/odd) for me to have that attraction. If I did, I would proudly don the queer mantle! If I fucked men, I would proudly claim heterosexual. If I fucked men and women, I would proudly claim bi-sexual. This is just how I see it.

As a woman, I will NOT be told how to dress, how to behave, how to fuck. EVER. As a lesbian, I will wear a huge cock ( or not), I will fuck with passion, I will wear a hat and boots and drive a big ugly truck, I will write poetry and watch the sun fill our skies with soft pastels. I will build a shed, renovate my home, tend our garden, wash our laundry, fuss over wonderful fabrics and spoil our fur babies. I will help raise our son to hopefully be aware of feminism and help our neighbors.

I am happy to see this topic coming up and happier still to see us beginning to own our pride, in whatever identity we fall into. To say "lesbian" is passe is like saying watermelon is passe. It is still here, alive and well even though some folks prefer cantaloupe or honeydew or mangoes.

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRDdSmzuessOrIhOShq2kP_E6Wd-ja7T969ysDBqkkl4bfMHCWX


Jess,

This speaks to me on so many different levels. Of particular interest today is how you pointed out that some of us use the word lesbian in a narrowly focused way. Yet, in doing so, the intent is not to take away from others or to be in opposition to others. I would add in to not be in competition with others as well.

I have asked repeatedly in this thread what is so threatening about lesbians, who define very narrowly asking for their own space to talk. I didnt think I was getting an answer. But, I was. I got so caught up in the forest, I couldnt see the trees.

For others, like me, who are connect-the-dots challenged, it occurred to me this morning, that it was people who narrowly define like me who excluded many women and lesbians back in the day.

One group we excluded was the butch-femme community. Thankfully they went ahead and made their own community. Here, those people we excluded found a home, a place to be all that they were.

And, a couple of days ago, here comes this narrow definition lesbian, asking for narrow definition lesbian space to discuss narrow definition lesbian stuff.

Deja vu? Wounds run deep. You, inadvertantly pick at the scars, the rawness of the wounds find the light of day.

Did I connect the dots in the right order?

[Chazz]

....Defending or reclaiming one might be taking a position against another. It often is the case. i have given examples....

There's a ton of research on identity formation, much of which talks about how it is created by defining oneself in opposition to the other, by disavowing another group. i think that's a normal way of thinking....

If it's a "normal way of thinking", and research verifies it, what's the problem?

What you're sayng, here, is simply not logical or accurate. It's a false conflation. Defining oneself differently is not oppositional. It does not equate to a disavowal.

If I say: I am me, you are you, that's not disavowing you (or anyone else). It's simply saying You're not me. When did it become NOT okay to say You're not me?

ANSWER: When objectivity (demonstrable fact) caved to subjectivity (feelings), that's when. Yes, some "facts" are proven wrong over time, but proving them wrong never makes feelings facts.

(BTW, there hasn't been even a whiff of anybody disavowing anyone/or group in this thread. It's simply been lesbians saying: As a lesbian I feel marginalized in the community . Yes, that means someone or some group has been doing the marginalizing. That isn't a disavowal - it's a call for reflection.)


But ID formation on a greater than individual level is sticky stuff. i used to be offended (as a woman) by definitions of femme that implied that a reconsidered and reconstructed femme femininity was somehow superior to that of straight women. Anyway, femme cultural products are full of such statements. Less so anymore.

My point is that ID formation can come out of disavowals of the other. It can disparage the other. Definitions that imply that straight women are less reflective of or transgressive in their femininity are examples.

EXCEPT when straight women ARE, demonstrably, "less reflective of or transgressive in their femininity" as they strive to fit a patriarchal paradigm.


But when you take it up a level to DEFENDING a supposedly beleaguered identity, you enter into a discourse that does more than potentially demean the other. The poor me stuff can lead to justifications for exclusion or worse. It's the rhetoric of oppression. The speakers may SOUND like victims, but they are justifying something else.

So i am not calling anyone here an oppressor. But this kind of discourse is dangerous. In any context.

What, then, are you calling the lesbians in this thread who do feel marginalized? "Dangerous" discoursers???? If so, I'm down with it. :gimmehug:






"The rheotoric of oppression. Poor me stuff. SOUND like victims."

Wow powerful stuff. Sends a big message. In the midst of what is going on here, it is plain and simple deflection. And, it is further evidence of misogyny, sexism, and homophobia being alive and well in our own community.

Maybe about the "misogyny, sexism, and homophobia" stuff, maybe.... Then again, maybe it's just post-modern/gender theory hermeneutics. You know, the discourse of it's okay when I do it, you, not so much because everything is relative and subjective until I say it's not.

Really Kobi :), ya gotta get down with the post-modern semiotics :readfineprint: or you're not going to see the big picture, or be welcome in the big tent.

.....Funny things those semantics huh?


I'll say.

[I'mOneToo]

Hi Kobi,

I'm one too! A proud Lesbian, that is. Wish I could find my old button that says that, which was purchased probably sometime back in the early 80's at a women's bookstore (dyke heaven, back in the day). It's around here somewhere. I'm a reclaimer too. Never lost my self, just needs to be occasionally tuned in. Like when you are in the car, and the radio starts to receive static... just turn the button back to where the reception is clear and strong. Lesbian Feminism has informed my consciousness from an early age, and can't imagine tuning it out, or needing to. The fine tuning of my Butch self, is not my main focus in life. It's just what it is, not an affectation but my unadorned unassailable presence. I could lose my boots, or pants, or boxer briefs, and still be Butch.

But like a three-legged stool -- Lesbian/Feminist/Woman -- if any of those were removed I would fall down. There have been many splinters carved out of it and supports added underneath it, especially in recent years, but as long the three original legs remain in place I will always have a place to sit.




When I started this thread, I hoped it would not turn into a debate of terminology, or who owns what words, or who has the current rights to whatever.

I am a freakin lesbian - one of those relic women who wants to be with women who want to be with other women.

I am tired of feeling invisible in my own community. I am tired of feeling like a guest in my own community.

I just wanted a place to be where others like me can get together and say "hey yea we are still here and we are still ok and we still have a voice and we're not going away."

Is that too much to ask?

[Chazz]

Right on AJ. But I will go further than doing no harm and further than empowerment. Articulating feminist principles today should have at least these specific grounding and intersecting principles: linking oppressions, dismantling patriarchy, and women in leadership positions.

Respectfully, I'd like to offer a fourth "grounding". It could be optional for those to whom it may apply.

It is as follows: That masculine butches (me), be allowed (perchance, encouraged) to reconcile with our woman/female selves after years (in some cases, a lifetime) of self-estrangement. And that, that self-reconciliation be celebrated, discussed and parsed, and NOT SEEN AS DISAVOWING, NEGATING, OR OPPRESSING ANYONE ELSE.

This is something I have been struggling with on my own; it would be nice to find some lesbian/butch kindred spirits.

[Kobi]

Per wikipedia:


Semiotics, also called semiotic studies or (in the Saussurean tradition) semiology, is the study of signs and sign processes (semiosis), indication, designation, likeness, analogy, metaphor, symbolism, signification, and communication. Semiotics is closely related to the field of linguistics, which, for its part, studies the structure and meaning of language more specifically. Semiotics is often divided into three branches:

Semantics: Relation between signs and the things to which they refer; their denotata, or meaning
Syntactics: Relations among signs in formal structures
Pragmatics: Relation between signs and the effects they have on the people who use them

Semiotics is frequently seen as having important anthropological dimensions; for example, Umberto Eco proposes that every cultural phenomenon can be studied as communication.[citation needed] However, some semioticians focus on the logical dimensions of the science. They examine areas belonging also to the natural sciences – such as how organisms make predictions about, and adapt to, their semiotic niche in the world (see semiosis). In general, semiotic theories take signs or sign systems as their object of study: the communication of information in living organisms is covered in biosemiotics or zoosemiosis.

Syntactics is the branch of semiotics that deals with the formal properties of signs and symbols.[1] More precisely, syntactics deals with the "rules that govern how words are combined to form phrases and sentences."[2] Charles Morris adds that semantics deals with the relation of signs to their designata and the objects which they may or do denote; and, pragmatics deals with the biotic aspects of semiosis, that is, with all the psychological, biological, and sociological phenomena which occur in the functioning of signs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiotics


My "wtf does this mean/now I have to figure it out dont I?" chore of the day. Thanks Chazz LOL.

[Chazz]

Sorry, Kobi.

It's just that a misspoken word, a poor turn of phrase, can result in page after page of gender warfare.

My use of the term "Semiotics" was me balancing on one toe as I walked on eggshells. Successful or not, I strive for clarity. I also try and show that words have meaning and that some words are more meaningful than others.

[Kobi]

Respectfully, I'd like to offer a fourth "grounding". It could be optional for those to whom it may apply.

It is as follows: That masculine butches (me), be allowed (perchance, encouraged) to reconcile with our woman/female selves after years (in some cases, a lifetime) of self-estrangement. And that, that self-reconciliation be celebrated, discussed and parsed, and NOT SEEN AS DISAVOWING, NEGATING, OR OPPRESSING ANYONE ELSE.

This is something I have been struggling with on my own; it would be nice to find some lesbian/butch kindred spirits.


Whoa, sometimes truths just blow me away in a good way. This is something, I too, am finding to be necessary at this stage of my life.
Maybe its part of why I have this need to reclaim my lesbianism in a very vocal, public way.

[Heart]

See, the thing is, I still want to separate identity and issues, (politics. movements, policies, oppressions, etc). There are lesbians who do not share my feminism. And there are feminists who are not lesbians, or even women. If I have to choose, I'll choose the feminists. Not because I'm not proud to be a lesbian, but because being a feminist is where I can effect action and change. (Fortunately, I don't have to choose.)

What I got from Martina's posts, the way I understood them, is that as long as we focus on uniting around identities, even when we try to be inclusive, we are bound to fail, and we are at risk of in-fighting, erasure, and unexamined bias.

Which is why I keep trying to re-focus on issues. And why ultimately what's most concerning for me in the BV conflict was the excising of feminism from the mission statement, as well as un-addressed misogyny and agism within the organization. It's not that I don't care about butch women/lesbians being marginalized, I do - deeply. They are the ones that brought these issues to the fore and I applaud them and support them for that.

But as long as we focus on who is in/out of the "community" based upon identity, we will just keep policing each other, parsing identities endlessly, get all huffy and offended, and redefining ourselves and each other ad nauseum.

I'm off topic for a lesbian pride thread, but what I'm saying is in the end it's about bringing our lesbian pride to bear upon issues that impact us --misogyny, sexism, homophobia, agism. racism, etc....

Heart

[I'mOneToo]

My personal reconciliation of self has been perceived by some outside of myself as an abandonment of myself, or an abandonment of who they are in relation to me. My changing, dropping or adding a descriptor for myself doesn't change anyone else. Others change too, and I'm as accepting of that in others as myself.

Respectfully, I'd like to offer a fourth "grounding". It could be optional for those to whom it may apply.

It is as follows: That masculine butches (me), be allowed (perchance, encouraged) to reconcile with our woman/female selves after years (in some cases, a lifetime) of self-estrangement. And that, that self-reconciliation be celebrated, discussed and parsed, and NOT SEEN AS DISAVOWING, NEGATING, OR OPPRESSING ANYONE ELSE.

This is something I have been struggling with on my own; it would be nice to find some lesbian/butch kindred spirits.

[Heart]

Respectfully, I'd like to offer a fourth "grounding". It could be optional for those to whom it may apply.

It is as follows: That masculine butches (me), be allowed (perchance, encouraged) to reconcile with our woman/female selves after years (in some cases, a lifetime) of self-estrangement. And that, that self-reconciliation be celebrated, discussed and parsed, and NOT SEEN AS DISAVOWING, NEGATING, OR OPPRESSING ANYONE ELSE.

This is something I have been struggling with on my own; it would be nice to find some lesbian/butch kindred spirits.

Chazz -- yes. This is so clear and important. I appreciate and support your butch voice on this and realize that I may be wandering from a central and crucial point in the discussion.

Exposing the marginalization of butch women is very much a feminist issue and part of resisting sexism and misogyny.

Apologies if what I said felt at all dismissive.

Heart

[Chazz]

Whoa, sometimes truths just blow me away in a good way. This is something, I too, am finding to be necessary at this stage of my life.
Maybe its part of why I have this need to reclaim my lesbianism in a very vocal, public way.



Well, here I am, Kobi. Sounds like we're on the same path. :)

It's been real tough trying to find butch kindred spirits to this end. There's been a headlong rush towards masculinizing "butch", draining it of femaleness, and affirming male IDed people. I got swept up in this, myself, with some help from partners. Hell, I had three consecutive partners insist I was a "Stone". (Been in EMDR therapy and guess what, I'm not.)

Whether anyone wants to acknowledge it or not, femaleness/womanhood has been situated on a lower rung on the neo-butch hierarchy. Except, when femaleness/womanhood applies to MtoFs.

I SEE THIS EVERYWHERE IN THE COMMUNITY ! ! ! !

I do see reclaiming lesbianism (sexual orientation) as somewhat different than (though, related) with reclaiming my womanhood/femaleness (biology - not gender). I have to find the words to express this. (Chazz, keep it simple, stupid :doh:).

[Chazz]

Chazz -- yes. This is so clear and important. I appreciate and support your butch voice on this and realize that I may be wandering from a central and crucial point in the discussion.

Exposing the marginalization of butch women is very much a feminist issue and part of resisting sexism and misogyny.

Apologies if what I said felt at all dismissive.

Heart

Oh Heart, I don't feel you're being dismissive in the slightest - never, ever.

The above post makes me feel hugged by you. Thanks, Heart. It's nice to feel that it's okay to be honest and vulnerable, and to have someone reach out and hug you.

I, too, see Feminism as the only effective discourse for addressing "misogyny, sexism, homophobia, ageism. racism, etc....".

I've spent ten years searching gender theory for a way to address these issues. It's just not there. Even if everyone REALLY understood the semantical jiujitsu's of gender theory, it's not there.

[Jess]

Well, here I am, Kobi. Sounds like we're on the same path. :)

It's been real tough trying to find butch kindred spirits to this end. There's been a headlong rush towards masculinizing "butch", draining it of femaleness, and affirming male IDed people. I got swept up in this, myself, with some help from partners. Hell, I had three consecutive partners insist I was a "Stone". (Been in EMDR therapy and guess what, I'm not.)

Whether anyone wants to acknowledge it or not, femaleness/womanhood has been situated on a lower rung on the neo-butch hierarchy. Except, when femaleness/womanhood applies to MtoFs.

I SEE THIS EVERYWHERE IN THE COMMUNITY ! ! ! !

I do see reclaiming lesbianism (sexual orientation) as somewhat different than (though, interrelated) with reclaiming my womanhood/femaleness (biology - not gender). I have to find the words to express this. (Chazz, keep it simple, stupid :doh:).

I guess I see them very much hand in hand , at least for myself. I too allowed myself to be swept up in the Hy/He pronoun juggling. It was at once a joyous celebration of finding safe space for my "butchness" , finding clarity with my body dysphoria, and creating a space for myself that felt authentic on my butch level , even if not so much on my female/woman level.

I am stone. Of this I have no doubt. I still have issues with my female form ( and probably always will to some degree). I am a woman and without that and some sense of pride in that, I cannot experience and LIVE my lesbian pride. Without that, I can also not live my butch pride. So, while these re-claimings may be different, they do operate simultaneously for me.

I also see feminist theory as the only way we ( the whole enchilada) can make strides against and hopefully see an end to the marginalization of ANY group of persons with common traits. I am sometimes short sighted and very much appreciate reminders. Thank you Heart for the tireless efforts in keeping us aware.

[BullDog]

I am a proud lesbian and proud butch woman. I always have been. Other people's personal definitions of themselves do not threaten me. There are all different types of lesbians, women and butches. I celebrate that.

As far as reconciling butch, woman, female and lesbian, for a short time I felt some distance from woman. I thought that I was always politically aligned with woman but that perhaps it wasn't so much my gender. That my gender was simply butch. However, quite frankly that was just me over thinking gender and straying from woman- however temporarily and partial that may have been- robbed me of some of my strength and connection with other women. I came back to fully embracing woman and for me it is quite empowering. It is my connection to all women- past, present and future. It is my birthright and central to my day to day lived reality. It is also my fervent hope as a non-conforming and butch woman to help expand the possibilities of what woman is and can be, just as I have been enriched and inspired by all the brave women who have come before me. Certainly being a lesbian is completely tied into all this as well. It is at the core of me being butch.

[Jess]

Jess,

This speaks to me on so many different levels. Of particular interest today is how you pointed out that some of us use the word lesbian in a narrowly focused way. Yet, in doing so, the intent is not to take away from others or to be in opposition to others. I would add in to not be in competition with others as well.

I have asked repeatedly in this thread what is so threatening about lesbians, who define very narrowly asking for their own space to talk. I didnt think I was getting an answer. But, I was. I got so caught up in the forest, I couldnt see the trees.

For others, like me, who are connect-the-dots challenged, it occurred to me this morning, that it was people who narrowly define like me who excluded many women and lesbians back in the day.

One group we excluded was the butch-femme community. Thankfully they went ahead and made their own community. Here, those people we excluded found a home, a place to be all that they were.

And, a couple of days ago, here comes this narrow definition lesbian, asking for narrow definition lesbian space to discuss narrow definition lesbian stuff.

Deja vu? Wounds run deep. You, inadvertantly pick at the scars, the rawness of the wounds find the light of day.

Did I connect the dots in the right order?









Kobi,
Thank you for the response.

I can understand how you might feel some guilt ( this is how I read your post) around a narrow definition that not everyone fits into. I however, do not feel this way with the word lesbian or dyke for that matter.

For me, it IS a narrow definition that encompasses a wide variety of its collective. By and large and for no reason other than to fight oppression, Gay men came together and said "no more!" ( well, first they came together to meet other kindreds, then later organized to fight oppression) Lesbians did the same thing. We were ( and still are mind you) oppressed for nothing more than loving same sex partners. From THIS, came our culture. Not the other way around. ( ok, granted some lesbian/ gay writers wrote books without a defined community already in place, it wasn't until the gatherings/ movements started that these obscure artists gained recognition)

I will never say that I feel all lesbians or even a fraction of them should dress such and such a way, or listen to only female voices or eat whole grains or live up to their armpits in dirt. We are as different and unique as women are from one another. I will however always believe that the common denominator/ definition of lesbian/ dyke is that we are women who love other women.

I never wish to make someone else feel marginalized or less than. I also have no desire to claim something I clearly do not live.

Thank you, again.

[Apocalipstic]

Jess,

This speaks to me on so many different levels. Of particular interest today is how you pointed out that some of us use the word lesbian in a narrowly focused way. Yet, in doing so, the intent is not to take away from others or to be in opposition to others. I would add in to not be in competition with others as well.

I have asked repeatedly in this thread what is so threatening about lesbians, who define very narrowly asking for their own space to talk. I didnt think I was getting an answer. But, I was. I got so caught up in the forest, I couldnt see the trees.

For others, like me, who are connect-the-dots challenged, it occurred to me this morning, that it was people who narrowly define like me who excluded many women and lesbians back in the day.

One group we excluded was the butch-femme community. Thankfully they went ahead and made their own community. Here, those people we excluded found a home, a place to be all that they were.

And, a couple of days ago, here comes this narrow definition lesbian, asking for narrow definition lesbian space to discuss narrow definition lesbian stuff.

Deja vu? Wounds run deep. You, inadvertantly pick at the scars, the rawness of the wounds find the light of day.

Did I connect the dots in the right order?




I am not sure about Jess, but that is what I was trying to say! :)


Whoa, sometimes truths just blow me away in a good way. This is something, I too, am finding to be necessary at this stage of my life.
Maybe its part of why I have this need to reclaim my lesbianism in a very vocal, public way.



I have been in a stage where I preferred the word Dyke. I am seeing the importance of those of us who are Lesbians embracing the word and not making it about who has or has not accepted us...who has or has not suffered more.

Being a woman is hard and as we have been discussing standing up for ourselves seems to be less and less OK. I have been thinking about this lately in general so this really ties in for me.

Chazz -- yes. This is so clear and important. I appreciate and support your butch voice on this and realize that I may be wandering from a central and crucial point in the discussion.

Exposing the marginalization of butch women is very much a feminist issue and part of resisting sexism and misogyny.

Apologies if what I said felt at all dismissive.

Heart

Yes and yes!

Yesterday I was trying to say that Femmes are marginalized too, but I hope in doing so I did not come off sounding like ONLY Femmes are marginalized.

I am thrilled beyond belief to see actual Butches who id as Women speak up.

Yeay!

and

I do see how it is important from a Feminist standpoint to call myself Lesbian if I am in fact Lesbian, rather than thinking up cute other names I prefer.

ps. This does not however mean I will be listening to Lesbian music ;). I will find other ways to be supportive.

[Chazz]

Here's why I feel obliged to say: I see reclaiming lesbianism (sexual orientation) as somewhat different than (though, related) with reclaiming my womanhood/femaleness (biology - not gender)'.

It's important to me to acknowledge that not all lesbians are butches or femmes. That, to me, is Sisterhood.

Furthermore, there is an operative in play. That is the, often tacit, assumption that masculine butches are automatically assumed to be male-identified unless they say otherwise. (That may not be the operative in this thread, but it is in many places. It's why I feel obliged to be as succinct as possible.)

And, the nouveau construct that a female-bodied person partnered with another female-bodied person, may not be a lesbian.

It is a drag to have to issue disclaimers when talking about my identity and my desire for reconciliation, but it's an unfortunate reality when words have been redefined and appropriated by those who do not identity as women or lesbians.

[LipstickLola]

I am lesbian, nothing to reclaim, never was lost, nothing confusing to me......I just simply 'am'. I can be alone, or with others like me, I am what I am.......

[AtLast]

I have not experienced the negative impact that many within our community has via lesbians- my guess is that my experience is very much like what Heart has stated.

Yet, I certainly get how and why so many here have struggled with the term due to their past experiences. Reclaiming and applying what we know as queers to lesbian seems really important to me. There is just not one kind of lesbian and it is about time that it reflects how diverse the world we live in really is.

[Apocalipstic]

I have not experienced the negative impact that many within our community has via lesbians- my guess is that my experience is very much like what Heart has stated.

Yet, I certainly get how and why so many here have struggled with the term due to their past experiences. Reclaiming and applying what we know as queers to lesbian seems really important to me. There is just not one kind of lesbian and it is about time that it reflects how diverse the world we live in really is.

I think that the difference is geographic. Even back in the 80's I actually remember seeing feminine and butch looking lesbians out in the bars in NYC and LA...while in TN everyone looked alike.

[CherylNYC]

I've been thanking everyone. If I missed tagging a post with my 'thank you' it was an oversight. This thread has been a gift to me. The articulate lesbian voices here have been like water in the desert.

I heart Heart. You rock. ScandalAndy gives me hope for our future. You rock, too. I'm loving every post by the butch lesbians. Every single one. I don't want to leave anyone out, but I've practically squealed out loud over posts by Chazz, Kobi, Jess, Bulldog, and Aj. I've waited far too long to hear butch women reclaim 'woman' and 'lesbian'.

Damn, this is good. Many apologies if I forgot to mention someone. I just couldn't keep it in anymore.

[Chazz]

Jess,

This speaks to me on so many different levels. Of particular interest today is how you pointed out that some of us use the word lesbian in a narrowly focused way. Yet, in doing so, the intent is not to take away from others or to be in opposition to others. I would add in to not be in competition with others as well.

I have asked repeatedly in this thread what is so threatening about lesbians, who define very narrowly asking for their own space to talk....

....And, a couple of days ago, here comes this narrow definition lesbian, asking for narrow definition lesbian space to discuss narrow definition lesbian stuff.

Deja vu? Wounds run deep. You, inadvertantly pick at the scars, the rawness of the wounds find the light of day.

Did I connect the dots in the right order?



I'm still thinking about this "defining oneself in opposition" business....

Let's pluck out the term opposition from that statement and drop in the word, contrast.... As in, F/W IDed butches stand in contrast to male IDed butches - not in how we look, necessarily, but in how we identify. (I look mega butch - whatever that means - and, so what?)

Is there something about contrasting identities that some find unsettling, even as they are questioning our willingness to embrace diversity?

Why proffer veiled accusations about "opposition" and "oppression" in this thread?

Why would "we" experience a need for a thread about reclaiming lesbian pride if "we" weren't already painfully aware of "opposition", "oppression"?

For me, the answer to these questions lies in Feminism and in the Civil Rights Movement.... Here's an article by Marilyn Frye that offers insight.



OPPRESSION and the use of definition
by Marilyn Frye

"It is a fundamental claim of feminism that women are oppressed. The word "oppression" is a strong word. It repels and attracts. It is dangerous and dangerously fashionable and endangered. It is much misused, and sometimes not innocently.

The statement that women are oppressed is frequently met with the claim that men are oppressed too. We hear that oppressing is oppressive to those who oppress as well as those they oppress. Some men cite as evidence of their oppression their much-advertised inability to cry. It is tough, we are told, to be masculine. When the stresses and frustrations of being a man are cited as evidence that oppressors are oppressed by their oppressing, the word "oppression" is being stretched to meaninglessness; it is treated as though its scope includes any and all human experience of limitation or suffering, no matter the cause, degree or consequence. Once such usage has been put over on us, then if ever we deny that any person or group is oppressed, [Chazz says: Or fail, to explicitly say as much, every time we open our mouths] we seem to imply that we think they never suffer and have no feelings. We are accused of insensitivity; even of bigotry. For women, such accusation is particularly intimidating, since sensitivity is one of the few virtues that has been assigned to us. If we are found insensitive, we may fear we have no redeeming traits at all and perhaps are not real women. Thus are we silenced before we begin: the name of our situation drained of meaning and our guilt mechanisms tripped.

....The boundary that sets apart women’s sphere is maintained and promoted by men generally for the benefit of men generally, and men generally do benefit from its existence, even the man who bumps into it and complains of the inconvenience...."


READ THE ARTICLE IN ITS ENTIRETY AT: http://zinelibrary.info/files/Frye.pdf

:vigil:

[Chazz]

I've been thanking everyone. If I missed tagging a post with my 'thank you' it was an oversight. This thread has been a gift to me. The articulate lesbian voices here have been like water in the desert.

I heart Heart. You rock. ScandalAndy gives me hope for our future. You rock, too. I'm loving every post by the butch lesbians. Every single one. I don't want to leave anyone out, but I've practically squealed out loud over posts by Chazz, Kobi, Jess, Bulldog, and Aj. I've waited far too long to hear butch women reclaim 'woman' and 'lesbian'.

Damn, this is good. Many apologies if I forgot to mention someone. I just couldn't keep it in anymore.


Ahh, I made a woman squeal.... And, here I was thinking I'd hung up my squealer-majjig for awhile. it's nice to hear the sound of music, again. :curtain:

Thank you, CherylNYC. I may be butch, you may be femme

[christie]

I've been thanking everyone. If I missed tagging a post with my 'thank you' it was an oversight. This thread has been a gift to me. The articulate lesbian voices here have been like water in the desert.

I heart Heart. You rock. ScandalAndy gives me hope for our future. You rock, too. I'm loving every post by the butch lesbians. Every single one. I don't want to leave anyone out, but I've practically squealed out loud over posts by Chazz, Kobi, Jess, Bulldog, and Aj. I've waited far too long to hear butch women reclaim 'woman' and 'lesbian'.

Damn, this is good. Many apologies if I forgot to mention someone. I just couldn't keep it in anymore.

Cheryl -

Thank you SO much for saying this! Its one thing for me to sit back and read posts and think, "Wow - that's some good shit - I completely understand that"; however, to have that validated, just thanks.

I feel so fortunate to not only get to share in the posts made by everyone here, but even moreso to have been a witness in watching that journey back to self-acceptance and its been quite amazing.

To me, "woman" has never been in question. I celebrate and rejoice in being a woman. I seek opportunities to set stereotypes of both woman AND lesbian on their ears and usually find them in the most unlikely of places (think line at the local wally world).

I do understand the herstory of how some might not have felt comfortable in claiming lesbian. I'm so glad to see it being embraced.

Kobi - a special thank you for starting the thread and hanging tough. Its spawned some pretty damned good stuff.

Christie

PS - i heart Heart too! I don't have nearly the experience and knowledge of feminism and am always delighted to read her perspective on things.

[Kobi]

As long as we are doing the kudos thing....and thank you for them....I would like to add that I am absolutely thrilled by what I am seeing here.

It is truly awesome to see the insights, knowledge, personal truths, thoughts, feelings, and just everything that is unfolding here. It takes a lot of courage to speak up about this stuff and there is certainly no shortage of bravery here.

I am very proud of both the folks who are contributing and of those who graciously stepped aside to allow this discussion to develop.

[Kobi]

And, the nouveau construct that a female-bodied person partnered with another female-bodied person, may not be a lesbian.




This is the second time today I have seen this. My brain is a little fried tonight but I am quite sure I did not get a memo on this. What is this about?

[ScandalAndy]

This is the second time today I have seen this. My brain is a little fried tonight but I am quite sure I did not get a memo on this. What is this about?



My understanding of it is that the individuals involved may not, for their own reasons, identify as lesbians. A bisexual female couple, for example.

Very interested to hear others' interpretations, though.

[Apocalipstic]

I think even though this is a website owned by Lesbians, the Butch Femme community has really been hard on what I call BullDykes.

Shes have been told they can't be Shes and that they need to change their names to male names. Not by this website, but out in the community and on other websites.

Not taking away from any other identity. Not being phobic.

I think that because of that checkered past, a place specifically labeled as Lesbian is needed to make sure Lesbians feel welcome too. Lesbians have somehow ended up feeling like a minority and I get that.

I think its cool that one was asked for and that it was set up and that Medusa gets it and came in to explain and show her support! :)

Kobi that you for starting this thread and AtLast and Chazz and AJ and BullDog and Heart and Toughy and each and every one of you for consistently reminding us that some of us here and now are women who love women and that is definitely something to be way proud of!

[Heart]

Well... in the language of my ancestors... I am verklempt!

:cheer:

These posts have been so moving and gratifying.... much thanks to all of you.

[Chazz]

And, the nouveau construct that a female-bodied person partnered with another female-bodied person, may not be a lesbian.


My understanding of it is that the individuals involved may not, for their own reasons, identify as lesbians. A bisexual female couple, for example.

Very interested to hear others' interpretations, though.

Yes ScandalAndy, you hit the nail on the head.

Earlier in this thread there was some back and forth about what being a "lesbian" actually means. It gave me pause for thought. I went down a certain path with it, which is not to imply there aren't different paths. Here's what I got on that.

There is a difference between being and doing.... Two straight/bisexual/...... women "doing it" with one another, does not qualify them as lesbians. A sex act and sexual orientation are not one and the same.

My sense of myself is about a great deal more than sex and gender identity.

I'm not an ally to women - I am a woman. A woman living in a sexist/homophobic/racist/ageist/patriarchal culture? I do not have the luxury of obsessively focusing on my gender to the exclusion of all else. Being a masculine woman does not confer protection.

For clarity sake: I'm a Lesbian Feminist, butch - not a Feminist. I have a different heritage than heterosexual Feminists. Something, I wish Feminism bashers would remember when they bring up the 2nd Wave gender wars. I, a butch, was the one getting bashed and marginalized by some Feminists. It was my war, not other people's war by proxy, or for the dubious purpose of dismissing all Feminists. Despite it all, I still find Feminism to be my way.

The "lesbian" designation is crucial to my Feminism because it says that my daily, lived life IS a political landscape. I've thrown my life open to political analysis. For me, the personal is political.

Gender theory has a different imperative. It's primarily about the personal - i.e. the political is (in service to the) personal.

[Kobi]

I'm still thinking about this "defining oneself in opposition" business....

Let's pluck out the term opposition from that statement and drop in the word, contrast.... As in, F/W IDed butches stand in contrast to male IDed butches - not in how we look, necessarily, but in how we identify. (I look mega butch - whatever that means - and, so what?)

Is there something about contrasting identities that some find unsettling, even as they are questioning our willingness to embrace diversity?

Why proffer veiled accusations about "opposition" and "oppression" in this thread?

Why would "we" experience a need for a thread about reclaiming lesbian pride if "we" weren't already painfully aware of "opposition", "oppression"?

:vigil:

I really like this idea of using "contrast" for a lot of reasons. To me, it seems to be a less threatening, more soothing word. It fits the intent of this discussion better. And, it feels more like a bridge to others.

Contrast implies more of a cooperative stance of equals.

Opposition/oppression implies more of a divisive, defensive stance of competitors.

Diversity is about contrasting parts of a whole.

Chazz, did I get my semiotics right?

Words, how we use them or misuse them, have profound effects on both the message sent and the message received. Is good to have reminders to choose our words carefully.

[Kobi]

A lot of good stuff is coming out of this discussion. I have been looking for themes that might benefit from having their own space to ferret stuff out a little more.

One of those themes was butch lesbians reconciling with the female/woman part of themselves.

There is now a thread called Lesbian Butches - Coming home to ourselves. Feel free to check it out.

[dreadgeek]

I also wanted to thank others who have participated on this thread and particular shout-outs for Kobi, for starting it and Heart for, well, being Heart.

Most of you know I'm not particularly effusive with my emotions--at least not here--I would like to say that I was profoundly relieved when I started to see how this thread was going. Quite honestly, I had been wondering if it was just me. I had really started to doubt myself because it seemed that some of the ideas that others have expressed concerns about appeared to be accepted as self-evidently true to so many within the queer community.

It's a relief to know I'm not alone in valuing being butch, lesbian and a woman.

cheers
Aj

[Kobi]

As part of all this reclaiming, I am looking for current writings on the gay community per se and feminism.

I found a couple of books in the library system on gay stuff but was not so lucky with the contemporary feminism stuff. Anyone know who the contemporaries might be? Be easier to search with names.

[ScandalAndy]

As part of all this reclaiming, I am looking for current writings on the gay community per se and feminism.

I found a couple of books in the library system on gay stuff but was not so lucky with the contemporary feminism stuff. Anyone know who the contemporaries might be? Be easier to search with names.





The World Split Open - Amazon.com: The World Split Open: How the Modern Women's Movement Changed America, Revised Edition (9780140097191): Ruth Rosen: Books


Gender Trouble - Amazon.com: RC Series Bundle: Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (Routledge Classics) (9780415389556): Judith Butler: Books



I know there are a few others, but I'm blanking on the names right now. I'll get back to you. :)

[Jess]

Hey Kobi,

Here are a couple sites that can give you a huge boost. You may have to do the six degrees of separation on some, as they are chock full of links . I have started doing a lot more reading thanks to conversations here. Again, thanks for the wonderful, albeit sometimes "uncomfortable" reminders of the importance of feminism in our lives.

Feminist Theory Website:
http://www.cddc.vt.edu/feminism/

Women's Studies and Online Resources:
http://userpages.umbc.edu/~korenman/wmst/

National Women's Studies Association:
http://www.nwsa.org/research/theguide/index.php

Artemis Guide to Women's Studies in the U.S.:
http://www.artemisguide.com/

Women and Gender Studies Web Sites:
http://libr.org/wss/wsslinks/index.html

Happy hunting!

[*Anya*]

I read this about 5-years ago and am sure it is just as timely. The description is from Google Books.

Identity poetics: race, class, and the lesbian-feminist roots of queer theory
Linda Garber

Columbia University Press, 2001 - Social Science - 262 pages
"Queer theory," asserts Linda Garber, "alternately buries and vilifies lesbian feminism, missing its valuable insights and ignoring its rich contributions." Rejecting the either/or choice between lesbianism and queer theory, she favors an inclusive approach that defies current factionalism. In an eloquent challenge to the privileging of queer theory in the academy, Garber calls for recognition of the historical -- and intellectually significant -- role of lesbian poets as theorists of lesbian identity and activism.

The connections, Garber shows, are most clearly seen when looking at the pivotal work of working-class lesbians/lesbians of color whose articulations of multiple, simultaneous identity positions and activist politics both belong to lesbian feminism and presage queer theory. "Identity Poetics" includes a critical overview of recent historical writing about the women's and lesbian-feminist movements of the 1970s; discussions of the works of Judy Grahn, Pat Parker, Audre Lorde, Adrienne Rich, and Gloria AnzaldAa; and, finally, a chapter on the rise and hegemony of queer theory within lesbigay studies.

[dreadgeek]

As part of all this reclaiming, I am looking for current writings on the gay community per se and feminism.

I found a couple of books in the library system on gay stuff but was not so lucky with the contemporary feminism stuff. Anyone know who the contemporaries might be? Be easier to search with names.



Kobi:

I don't have any suggestions at the moment, but just to say that hopefully within a year or so, if I can find a publisher, there'll be another book on this general theme. :)

Cheers
Adrienne

[Chazz]

I read this about 5-years ago and am sure it is just as timely. The description is from Google Books.

Identity poetics: race, class, and the lesbian-feminist roots of queer theory
Linda Garber

Columbia University Press, 2001 - Social Science - 262 pages
"Queer theory," asserts Linda Garber, "alternately buries and vilifies lesbian feminism, missing its valuable insights and ignoring its rich contributions." Rejecting the either/or choice between lesbianism and queer theory, she favors an inclusive approach that defies current factionalism. In an eloquent challenge to the privileging of queer theory in the academy, Garber calls for recognition of the historical -- and intellectually significant -- role of lesbian poets as theorists of lesbian identity and activism.

The connections, Garber shows, are most clearly seen when looking at the pivotal work of working-class lesbians/lesbians of color whose articulations of multiple, simultaneous identity positions and activist politics both belong to lesbian feminism and presage queer theory. "Identity Poetics" includes a critical overview of recent historical writing about the women's and lesbian-feminist movements of the 1970s; discussions of the works of Judy Grahn, Pat Parker, Audre Lorde, Adrienne Rich, and Gloria AnzaldAa; and, finally, a chapter on .

Great quote, Anya/Georgia. It's exactly as stated, I've seen it first hand.

I can't, I won't, rend my lesbianism from my Feminism. I don't care what new, kitschy "theory" comes along, or how much pressure is brought to bear to buy into it. My understanding of myself as a white privileged, woman and lesbian was illuminated for me by Feminism. It gave me an informed, humanistic/heuristic/moral center from which to function in the world that took me beyond self-preoccupation without insight. As I said earlier, Feminism is based in the personal is political - queer theory is based in the political is personal . That semantic shift is huge.

I'll have a lot to say about this, and will, in the coming days. Just now, I'm in a make or break battle with Patriarchy.... My Feminism tells me to reach out to other lesbian women who have been through this. Queer theory tells me to change myself and my wardrobe.

[dreadgeek]

I'll have a lot to say about this, and will, in the coming days. Just now, I'm in a make or break battle with Patriarchy.... My Feminism tells me to reach out to other lesbian women who have been through this. Queer theory tells me to change myself and my wardrobe.

Chazz:

With your kind permission, I would like to use the text I highlighted in red as an epigraph.

Cheers
Aj

[Chazz]

Chazz:

With your kind permission, I would like to use the text I highlighted in red as an epigraph.

Cheers
Aj


Umm, I'm not seeing anything highlighted in red.

[Heart]

I'm in a make or break battle with Patriarchy.... My Feminism tells me to reach out to other lesbian women who have been through this. Queer theory tells me to change myself and my wardrobe.

I'll wager this is what Aj intended to highlight.

Reach out Chazz, reach out!

Strength and courage,
Heart

[dreadgeek]

Umm, I'm not seeing anything highlighted in red.

Chazz:

Sorry about that, thought I'd done the text color inside the quoting correctly. Obviously not. This is what happens when I try to do intelligent things before the second cup of coffee.

What I'd like to quote you on, again with your kind permission, is this:

Feminism is based in the personal is political - queer theory is based in the political is personal.

Cheers
Aj

[dreadgeek]

I'm in a make or break battle with Patriarchy.... My Feminism tells me to reach out to other lesbian women who have been through this. Queer theory tells me to change myself and my wardrobe.

I'll wager this is what Aj intended to highlight.

Reach out Chazz, reach out!

Strength and courage,
Heart

This would ALSO be a great epigraph.

Cheers
Aj

[Kobi]

Thanks for the suggestions and links everyone. This is so cool. So much happened while I wasnt paying attention!

Aj - look forward to reading your book!

"Feminism is based in the personal is political - queer theory is based in the political is personal . That semantic shift is huge."

Chazz this is a very important distinction. Look forward to hearing more about it.

Now, of course, I have to go look up "queer theory" and "lavender linguistics".

[Jess]

I'll have a lot to say about this, and will, in the coming days. Just now, I'm in a make or break battle with Patriarchy.... My Feminism tells me to reach out to other lesbian women who have been through this. Queer theory tells me to change myself and my wardrobe.

Chazz,
This statement has echoed through my head since I read it earlier. It very much sounds like my state of mind in my younger days when I was about to sell everything, get off the grid and move to womyn's land. I didn't, as I felt that was too extreme then, as it was a complete reaction to being fed up with the "patiarchy" and just sharing my part of the world with men in general. In as much as I wanted to just be done with dealing with what I saw as my foe, I thought it better somehow, to stay and make my stand.

This may not be at all what you are alluding to. Could you please explain the "make it or break it battle" you are going through?

Thanks.

[Chazz]

Chazz,
This statement has echoed through my head since I read it earlier. It very much sounds like my state of mind in my younger days when I was about to sell everything, get off the grid and move to womyn's land. I didn't, as I felt that was too extreme then, as it was a complete reaction to being fed up with the "patiarchy" and just sharing my part of the world with men in general. In as much as I wanted to just be done with dealing with what I saw as my foe, I thought it better somehow, to stay and make my stand.

This may not be at all what you are alluding to. Could you please explain the "make it or break it battle" you are going through?

Thanks.

A child custody battle with a father who is abusive, rabidly homophobic and misogynist, watches porn with his 6 year old son, doesn't pay child support, files false CPS reposts, sees his son as a trophy of his male prowess rather that a human being, refuses to see that his son is a "special needs child" (and stands in the way of his getting services) ---- and, a Family Court judge who is all about "Father's Rights" and just awarded "Dad" joint custody.

[Jess]

Thanks. I'm sorry that this "battle" is not a metaphor and it is very much reality. I didn't mean to pry. To me, the broadness of your earlier post felt much more ethereal than a situation such as this.
I hate hearing of the countless stories like this. I am never sure whether to light a candle and send out positive thoughts into the universe or to gift wrap a Louisville slugger and send it to you.
Thanks again, take care.

[Kobi]

Chazz,

I, too, was hoping it was a metaphor. I'm sorry to hear it is not. Can send positive thoughts , offer a ear, and a shoulder if you need it.

[AtLast]

I also wanted to thank others who have participated on this thread and particular shout-outs for Kobi, for starting it and Heart for, well, being Heart.

Most of you know I'm not particularly effusive with my emotions--at least not here--I would like to say that I was profoundly relieved when I started to see how this thread was going. Quite honestly, I had been wondering if it was just me. I had really started to doubt myself because it seemed that some of the ideas that others have expressed concerns about appeared to be accepted as self-evidently true to so many within the queer community.

It's a relief to know I'm not alone in valuing being butch, lesbian and a woman.

cheers
Aj

Oh, so not alone! Looking toward your future works with great excitment!

[Chazz]

Thanks. I'm sorry that this "battle" is not a metaphor and it is very much reality. I didn't mean to pry. To me, the broadness of your earlier post felt much more ethereal than a situation such as this.
I hate hearing of the countless stories like this. I am never sure whether to light a candle and send out positive thoughts into the universe or to gift wrap a Louisville slugger and send it to you.
Thanks again, take care.


Chazz,

I, too, was hoping it was a metaphor. I'm sorry to hear it is not. Can send positive thoughts , offer a ear, and a shoulder if you need it.

Thank you, my Sisters.

As to my "battle" - all women's "battle" - being reality or metaphor..... All women's "battles" are both at once. This is what breeds (in "us") complacency, resignation, defeatism, self-disavowal, self-loathing, self-negation, mindless self-preoccupation, depoliticalization - and, horizontal oppression. Many times, all at once.

The "battle" with misogyny is the one-on-one of it, as in: I'm dealing with a misogynist individual.... The "battle" with patriarchy is the systemic front of the "battle". Misogyny begets patriarchy begets misogyny begets.... it's an endless loop of self-reification that is so pervasive many of us cannot look it in the eye, or take its full measure on a macrolevel. It's too much to process or bear. So we deny it, bargain with it, concede to it, or glimpse at it with one eye that is, itself, half shut. A body has gotta survive, after all.

I, like most female human beings who strive for some measure of peace and serenity, want to believe things have gotten better in the sexism department. Superficially, they have. People have become adroit at using PC language and gestures, usually when the stakes are low. That is the public face of benevolent sexism.... But when the stakes are high(er) and something of genuine value is on the line (i.e. wages, a promotion, a legal decision, equal rights legislation, budget debates, a child....), all pretense of parity and gender equity goes out the window.

Think, I mean REALLY think for a minute: "Who's interests are most at risk (REALLY, REALLY) in the budget debate? Women and children's - that's who. The services and programs most essential to "us" are the ones taking the biggest hits. (Marginal men's, too, but to a lesser degree.)

Look around.... state after state is tightening the restrictions on abortion. Why should I care, I'm a butch.... I care because "when they came for the gypsies, "I" said nothing....".

To the extent that we have all become so self-preoccupied with our gender identities, labels, neologisms, and wars.... we have abdicated our obligations to ourselves and one another. The System doesn't care what pronoun you or I use. It still sees us as children of a lesser God because we're woman or para men (in its mind).... It thinks this even as it (patriarchy) smiles in "our" faces and says otherwise, but only, when the stakes are low.

Feminism, NOT gender theory, addresses these things. Feminism canonizes "us" over "I" --- gender theory canonizes "I" over "us". The later leaves us standing alone in our consecrated subjectivity or, at best, marginally unified in some version of "Im okay, you're okay", but don't you dare ask too many questions 'cause we've got a "tent" to erect. (Tents, big or small, do not offer good cover in a war.)

Patriarchy has every tool at its disposal - it owns the System. It's perfected its dominion over our lives and our minds. Its most effective backlash against 2nd Wave Feminists was to turn women against Feminism (i.e. ourselves) and give us gender theory - a self-negating ideology that leaves us elbowing each other for a higher place on a mythical hierarchy for a bigger piece of the patriarchal pie. Ya gotta give it to patriarchy - it's brilliant

[*Anya*]

You can not see me right now but I am giving you a standing ovation.

Yes, yes and yes, again for your oh-so eloquent post. It reminds me so well of all the reasons why my feminism is so much a part of who I am.

I have pushed it down, dampened my feelings and beliefs in order to work, raise my children to their own respective womanhood and to be able to support them.

Thank you.

[Chazz]

To everyone who has been messaging me.... THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU ! ! ! ! :gimmehug:

And for good measure: XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXO

So there......


Here's the short of it.....

Was in a relationship with a woman for 8 years. Her daughter was 4 when we met. I raised that child as my own and became "Momma".

It was an interracial relationship (strange term that; aren't we all of the human race?). Mentioning race to say: This beautiful child was my teacher in so many ways. We cried, together, so many days when she arrived home from school because she was the only Black child in her class, and the butt of much taunting. (I live in a white, middle-class ghetto.) I still cannot find words for the hurt and rage I felt over her having to go through that. I felt so powerless and ill-equipped, so I cried with her.

(Keep it short, Chazz).... Anyway, her bio mother - who was always ambivalent towards her own child, even resented her - ceded most of the parenting to me. I loved it, even as it conjured nurturing feelings in me that were inconsistent with my understanding of myself as a mega masculine butch. (This was a large part of what prompted me to begin reclaiming my woman-self. I'll get to that at some point. Remind me, I get distracted....)

Then, it all went to hell, to this day I'm not entirely sure why?!?!? But, $50,000+ later in legal fees over a multi year custody battle and subsequent debt.... bio Mom gets herself in a (legal) jam, cleans out my bank account, taps out my credit cards, goes to work one day and never comes home (not so much as a phone call since) and hands over full custody of the child to her homophobic father. I haven't seen, or spoken to, "my" little girl since.

I spent two years fending off creditors not of my making (almost lost my house), but worse, I lived in a traumatized emotional stupor. I still mourn.

Always the optimist, I decide the solution for bad love is good love.

So, I get involved with another woman with a 7 year old son.... His father (the one I referred to in a prior post in this thread) starts making false CPS reports, sues for custody based on Mom and I having fist fights and sex in the kid's presence (neither of which, ever happened - the CPS reports came back unfounded, btw), but the judge still awards him joint custody.... The negativity, stress and ugliness took it's toll on the relationship - among other things - and, we're since parted ways.

Oh the joy of being butch and loving our partners' children.

I'm not much for public displays of my private business, but.... I can't help but wonder how much sexism and homophobia played a part in these, and other struggles, in my life.

I'm still the proverbial optimist in matters of love - just dumb, I guess - but I have been forced to reconsider what "theory" best addresses the issues making my life a living hell. I'm not seeing where gender theory addresses the things I'm living through. It was fun and edgy for awhile, but outside of the LGBTQ community, how I gender identify and look, still boil down to me being a female in a patriarchal culture. And, a lesbian woman at that. If I don't do, what I don't wanna do (i.e. transition to male), I don't see that changing much under gender theory.

[Kobi]

In the words of my ancestors, holy canoli Chazz! This made the radical feminist inside of me stand at attention.

I agree with your analysis. And, it is very clear to me, even if I dont have the postmodern terminology for it. What I am finding in print, to me, seems like an excess use of words to justify positions rather than something firmly grounded in female focused, female driven quest to attack the underlying pathology of the patriarchy.

And, I tend to look more at real life manifestations rather than the "theoretical analysis" of it. Often times the rhetoric doesnt fit the reality, no matter how many words we use to make it appear like it is something else.

In my opinion, when I look at the world, I see so many good changes for women. Yet, I also see more responsibility as well and perhaps in unintended ways. There is always a flip side to everything. If one bears more, another bears less.

There have been unmistakeable benefits for educated white women in professions that afford them more general freedoms. For non white, uneducated or less educated women there have been few if any benefits. Poverty in this group is rising at unprecedented porportions. http://www.nclej.org/poverty-in-the-us.php

Women freed ourselves sexually. Yay! Now, think again. We, as women, are second class citizens in a patriarchy. Did we "free" ourselves or did the partriarchy see there was a huge benefit to IT and them if we were "free"? Is it a win-win or are have we just played into our own objectification? Who wins in the politics of sex in a patriarchy?

Women took control of their own financial wellbeing. Yay for us! Now, think again. If we are supporting ourselves, who ends up having more disposable income?

Women took control of reproduction. Yay for us! Now, think again. We spend billions of dollars a year on a growing number of contraceptives which have the potential to adversely affect our bodies, our health and endanger our very lives. We bear the burden of the expense and risk to our heath. Male contraceptive, at the moment, still revolves around condoms and for the non wimping ones, a vasectomy. Orgasms aside, who won here?

Growing numbers of women who want to be a parent are happy to proceed without husbands and father figures for their children. I actually kind of like this one. But, men, in those cases, are merely sperm donors, without any financial or parental responsibility for the product of their seed. Looks to me like more for women and less for men again.

So, while we are so busy with getting an education, working, being sexually free, being parents without help, and all the other lovely "perks" of women's liberation, how much time and energy do we have to look at and speak to the "new and improved" manifestations of our oppression?

The great thinkers and leaders of feminism in my generation had a vision and foresight which continues to astound me. The great thinkers and leaders of today havent impressed me as much. They are well spoken, well educated, can turn a phrase with the best of them, and debate at a level that still eludes my full comprehension.

Yet, to me, the post modernists have dropped the proverbial ball. Actions speak louder than words. And when I look around me, I see some nifty stuff happened for women.

But, in the scheme of the patriarchy, greater things happened for IT and for those who benefit the most from it.

In case I havent said it today....I love this thread and all the great minds that are contributing to it.

[Apocalipstic]

I think things are better for women in many ways than they were when I was a child in the 60's, but they have not changed enough I agree and since the ERA was not passed we don't see as much written about of fought for except for from those who want to make abortions and birth control harder to get and want to re-establish what counts as rape. Rape affects us all. Pregnancies due to rate affect all women. Birth control affects everyone as we get more and more overcrowded....

Also, this "give the fathers the kids" shift. The children used to always go to the mother, but now, in the name of Women's Lib...somehow the trend seems to be to give the kids to the fathers, especially if they have more money...which considering the still wide split in wages...they are likely to have.

As a child I grew up with my father telling me he had total control of me and could do anything he wanted and he was right.

Yes more has been done with children's right and yes women can own property without a man but so much more is expected of us and the trend seems to be going back to a 50's model of marriage.

It really weirds me out that things are so much more conservative now than they were in the 70's and 80's. And rarely do we hear a peep from anyone about Equal Rights for Women.

Chazz, good for you for being a stand up Mom. It is heartbreaking that anyone would use a child as a pawn in a break up or just refuse to achnowledge that someone who was in a child's life for years should have the right to at least see the child.

[Heart]

[QUOTE=apocalipstic;397051]The children used to always go to the mother, but now, in the name of Women's Lib...somehow the trend seems to be to give the kids to the fathers, especially if they have more money...which considering the still wide split in wages...they are likely to have.
QUOTE]

Actually, it's a fallacy that kids always went to the mother. The truth is that historically fathers rarely sought custody of their children, so mom was the default. And when fathers did contest custody, they usually won - sometimes because they had more means, and sometimes simply because they were fathers making a demand and the courts complied, even if the mother was fit.

One of the things the so-called "Father's Rights" groups have done is to stand the concept of more involved and responsible fathering on its head by taking it into the courts. They claim they want to be more involved fathers, but the truth is they are using courts as a way to exert control over their ex-wives, with their children as pawns. They have conflated "involvement" with their agenda for ownership, hijacked the Responsible Father's Movement, and shifted it to one of father's RIGHTS (the change in terminology being telling).

There are involved and loving fathers who are divorcing and want to maintain strong connections to their children via shared custody.
Usually in these situations, the divorcing parents are able to come to a mediated agreement. Some men are faced with a vindictive ex-wife who is using the courts, but that is the statistical exception. It is more common for men to manipulate custody cases, most unfounded child welfare reports are made by men, and men routinely do better in family court forensics because they control more of the resources in the family.

In short, women don't do well in family court when it comes to contested custody and visitation cases, though the myth is that family courts always favor mothers. That's what Father's Rights groups want you to believe. They were the ones behind the spurious diagnosis of "parental alienation syndrome" used against abused mothers to wrest their children away, and they were also proponants of charging mothers who had been battered in front of their kids with "failing to protect" their children from domestic violence.

There are links, articles, research, etc. There's also the fact that after speaking as an advocate on behalf of battered mothers at a state hearing in Albany a number of years ago, a father's rights nut-job tried to run the car I was in off the road.

The harsh reality is, once you enter a court, it's about power, possession, property, legitimacy, and ownership, not about relationships, and that's where men have it all over women.

And if you're a lesbian parent without a biological or legal connection to the child, facing homophobia and misogyny, (both rooted in patriarchy), your chances are bleak. It remains to be seen what kind of impact legal marriage in some states will have on parenting in gay/lesbian families.

Heart

[Apocalipstic]

[QUOTE=apocalipstic;397051]The children used to always go to the mother, but now, in the name of Women's Lib...somehow the trend seems to be to give the kids to the fathers, especially if they have more money...which considering the still wide split in wages...they are likely to have.
QUOTE]

Actually, it's a fallacy that kids always went to the mother. The truth is that historically fathers rarely sought custody of their children, so mom was the default. And when fathers did contest custody, they usually won - sometimes because they had more means, and sometimes simply because they were fathers making a demand and the courts complied, even if the mother was fit.

One of the things the so-called "Father's Rights" groups have done is to stand the concept of more involved and responsible fathering on its head by taking it into the courts. They claim they want to be more involved fathers, but the truth is they are using courts as a way to exert control over their ex-wives, with their children as pawns. They have conflated "involvement" with their agenda for ownership, hijacked the Responsible Father's Movement, and shifted it to one of father's RIGHTS (the change in terminology being telling).

There are involved and loving fathers who are divorcing and want to maintain strong connections to their children via shared custody.
Usually in these situations, the divorcing parents are able to come to a mediated agreement. Some men are faced with a vindictive ex-wife who is using the courts, but that is the statistical exception. It is more common for men to manipulate custody cases, most unfounded child welfare reports are made by men, and men routinely do better in family court forensics because they control more of the resources in the family.

In short, women don't do well in family court when it comes to contested custody and visitation cases, though the myth is that family courts always favor mothers. That's what Father's Rights groups want you to believe. They were the ones behind the spurious diagnosis of "parental alienation syndrome" used against abused mothers to wrest their children away, and they were also proponants of charging mothers who had been battered in front of their kids with "failing to protect" their children from domestic violence.

There are links, articles, research, etc. There's also the fact that after speaking as an advocate on behalf of battered mothers at a state hearing in Albany a number of years ago, a father's rights nut-job tried to run the car I was in off the road.

The harsh reality is, once you enter a court, it's about power, possession, property, legitimacy, and ownership, not about relationships, and that's where men have it all over women.

And if you're a lesbian parent without a biological or legal connection to the child, facing homophobia and misogyny, (both rooted in patriarchy), your chances are bleak. It remains to be seen what kind of impact legal marriage in some states will have on parenting in gay/lesbian families.

Heart

Thank you for clarifying this. In the cases I know of personally, it have been about control and money and men have more of both, so they win.

Honestly the reason I never had children of my own is that I knew here in TN that my own father would have stepped in and gotten custody. That is what happens inn places like this. I could have moved, but staying here was more important to me at the time. Having a child somewhere with no support network where I did not know any one seemed too overwhelming.

[Chazz]

....Chazz, good for you for being a stand up Mom. It is heartbreaking that anyone would use a child as a pawn in a break up or just refuse to achnowledge that someone who was in a child's life for years should have the right to at least see the child.

I did the best I could, apocalipstic. Thank you for the recognition.

To this day, patriarchy (and it's enforcers) still see children as possessions, chattel. Many men still "their women" this way, too. No amount of neo-age, PC rhetoric has altered that an iota.

Even when a father is little more than a sperm donor, he has total ownership of a child. It doesn't matter that said child was parented, nurtured or financially supported by someone else for years. Biology IS destiny in the concrete world whether post-modernists recognize it or not through the haze of their immanent acts of mind.


One of the things the so-called "Father's Rights" groups have done is to stand the concept of more involved and responsible fathering on its head by taking it into the courts. They claim they want to be more involved fathers, but the truth is they are using courts as a way to exert control over their ex-wives [and punish them], with their children as pawns. They have conflated "involvement" with their agenda for ownership, hijacked the Responsible Father's Movement, and shifted it to one of father's RIGHTS (the change in terminology being telling). [Changes in terminology are always telling.]

There are involved and loving fathers who are divorcing and want to maintain strong connections to their children via shared custody.
Usually in these situations, the divorcing parents are able to come to a mediated agreement. Some men are faced with a vindictive ex-wife who is using the courts, but that is the statistical exception. It is more common for men to manipulate custody cases, most unfounded child welfare reports are made by men, and men routinely do better in family court forensics because they control more of the resources in the family.

In short, women don't do well in family court when it comes to contested custody and visitation cases, though the myth is that family courts always favor mothers. That's what Father's Rights groups want you to believe. [Claiming to be the greater victim/the aggrieved party are men's tools of choice these days as they expand their dominion over women.] They were the ones behind the spurious diagnosis of "parental alienation syndrome" used against abused mothers to wrest their children away, and they were also proponents of charging mothers who had been battered in front of their kids with "failing to protect" their children from domestic violence.

There are links, articles, research, etc. There's also the fact that after speaking as an advocate on behalf of battered mothers at a state hearing in Albany a number of years ago, a father's rights nut-job tried to run the car I was in off the road.

The harsh reality is, once you enter a court, it's about power, possession, property, legitimacy, and ownership, not about relationships, and that's where men have it all over women.

And if you're a lesbian parent without a biological or legal connection to the child, facing homophobia and misogyny, (both rooted in patriarchy), your chances are bleak. It remains to be seen what kind of impact legal marriage in some states will have on parenting in gay/lesbian families.

Heart


And gender theory is addressing these issues how?

[Heart]

And gender theory is addressing these issues how?

I'm not an academic and not an expert in gender theory or feminist theory, by any means. But Rosi Braidotti, an Italian feminist, has criticized gender studies as: "the take-over of the feminist agenda by studies on masculinity.... promoting gender as a way of de-radicalizing the feminist agenda, and re-marketing masculinity (including gay male identity), instead."

[Chazz]

I'm not an academic and not an expert in gender theory or feminist theory, by any means. But Rosi Braidotti, an Italian feminist, has criticized gender studies as: "the take-over of the feminist agenda by studies on masculinity.... promoting gender as a way of de-radicalizing the feminist agenda, and re-marketing masculinity (including gay male identity), instead."


In practice, gender theory is exactly that: "the take-over of the feminist agenda by studies on masculinity.... promoting gender as a way of de-radicalizing the feminist agenda, and re-marketing masculinity, instead...."

To that, I would add: Gender theory is also the rebranding of "womanhood", "female", "femininity" by men who cherish the binary and gender constructs because both serve their immanent acts of mind.

The bitter irony of lesbians being in the service of that agenda has turned "Sisterhood is powerful" into "Sisterhood as farce".

[Heart]

The popularization of gender theory (which is common in B-F-T communities), continues the worship and over-valuing of masculine/man/male, while expressing ambivalence and undervaluing of feminine/woman/female.
I don't find current expressions of "girl power," with its ongoing sexualization of children and commodification of women's bodies and sexuality, to be liberatory. And the reality is that binaries have been reinforced, rather than blurred, crossed, or jettisoned because gender theory, at least as enacted in queer communities, seems to lack any political analysis of institutionalized power.

Again, not an expert in gender theory in any way, just my observations.

[Chazz]

The popularization of gender theory (which is common in B-F-T communities), continues the worship and over-valuing of masculine/man/male, while expressing ambivalence and undervaluing of feminine/woman/female.
I don't find current expressions of "girl power," with its ongoing sexualization of children and commodification of women's bodies and sexuality, to be liberatory. And the reality is that binaries have been reinforced, rather than blurred, crossed, or jettisoned because gender theory, at least as enacted in queer communities, seems to lack any political analysis of institutionalized power.

Again, not an expert in gender theory in any way, just my observations.


Heart, you're a woman, a lesbian, with many years of experience within the "B-F-T communities" - YOU ARE AN EXPERT ! ! ! ! :gimmehug:

Another vastly different, and I think essential, aspect of Feminist/Womanist theory is that it's genesis was largely an evolve-up, grass roots form of heuristic that addresses multiple oppression (race, class, economic and ageism).... Gender theory is largely a creation of academicians and jocositists that speaks to a largely white, privileged and male identified constituency solely about gender.

[AtLast]

The popularization of gender theory (which is common in B-F-T communities), continues the worship and over-valuing of masculine/man/male, while expressing ambivalence and undervaluing of feminine/woman/female.
I don't find current expressions of "girl power," with its ongoing sexualization of children and commodification of women's bodies and sexuality, to be liberatory. And the reality is that binaries have been reinforced, rather than blurred, crossed, or jettisoned because gender theory, at least as enacted in queer communities, seems to lack any political analysis of institutionalized power. Again, not an expert in gender theory in any way, just my observations.

Mine as well. And this lack of analysis of institutionalized power is at the "heart" of racism as well. Just more reinforcement of an unequal foundation. What is so terribly sad to me is that gender theory could be such a positive force in de-constructing this power structure.

Don't get me started on "girl power"....

[Apocalipstic]

How does BF play into these gender roles?

It's difficult to dismantle what we seem to play into.

But I completely see that discussions about gender analysis do nothing to help the issues facing Women eccept as it related personally.

[Martina]

One of the reasons gender studies started investigating masculinity -- and this was at least twenty years ago -- was that the masculine and the male were considered the baseline, the ur gender, the the model of humanness. There needed to be an historical and cross-cultural understanding of how masculinity and maleness were constructed IN ORDER to destabilize the binary, in order to understand that the idea of male identity, especially in psychoanalysis and medicine, was not a stable social fact.

[Apocalipstic]

One of the reasons gender studies started investigating masculinity -- and this was at least twenty years ago -- was that the masculine and the male were considered the baseline, the ur gender, the the model of humanness. There needed to be an historical and cross-cultural understanding of how masculinity and maleness were constructed IN ORDER to destabilize the binary, in order to understand that the idea of male identity, especially in psychoanalysis and medicine, was not a stable social fact.

To the untrained eye it looks like it stuck there.

[Martina]

What's missing is a social movement. That's what we're longing for. And it's not coming out of women's studies or gender studies departments. Nor should it.

Women's Studies departments were built out of a social movement, but they are now parts of academic institutions. Students may start social movements, but their professors never will.

[CherylNYC]

One of the reasons gender studies started investigating masculinity -- and this was at least twenty years ago -- was that the masculine and the male were considered the baseline, the ur gender, the the model of humanness. There needed to be an historical and cross-cultural understanding of how masculinity and maleness were constructed IN ORDER to destabilize the binary, in order to understand that the idea of male identity, especially in psychoanalysis and medicine, was not a stable social fact.

Those who began by investigating the construct of maleness seem to have ended by fetishizing it instead. It's quite clear to me that although the intent may have once been to destabilise the gender binary, gender studies have had great success in promoting it.

Is there something transgressive about a female bodied person claiming that they are male because they resemble traditional males? Isn't that just saying that those who look and act traditionally male must BE male? What happened to dismantling assumptions about traditionally gendered behaviours?

I've been a gender transgressor for my entire lifetime. When I was six years old I boycotted the Flintstones, refusing to watch them because of the ridged gender stereotypes the show promoted. I started riding motorcycles in 1981. I instruct riders at the racetrack. I've made a living at various times as a carpenter and general contractor. Without any friends or family in the business, I earned a union card in the Stagehands Union in the mid 1980s. It's an infamously sexist and bigoted union, and 1986 was an inauspicious time for that sort of pioneering.

I've fought that war with my own body, too. I've been the object of unwanted sexual attention from men from my earliest memory. When a strong beard sprouted on my chin in my mid twenties, the attention magically disappeared. What a relief! I suddenly was free from daily verbal rape. I unselfconsciously wore my beard, along with my hairy legs, with my vintage dresses and high heeled shoes. I reasoned that anyone I wanted to know wouldn't care about my beard, or they might even admire my courage. I didn't shave it off until I was in my early 30s.

I did all of the above AS A WOMAN. I did the above declaring loudly all the while, "THIS IS WHAT A WOMAN LOOKS LIKE".

That's what it looks like to dismantle the gender binary in my world.

[Martina]

Those who began by investigating the construct of maleness seem to have ended by fetishizing it instead. It's quite clear to me that although the intent may have once been to destabilise the gender binary, gender studies have had great success in promoting it.

Is there something transgressive about a female bodied person claiming that they are male because they resemble traditional males? Isn't that just saying that those who look and act traditionally male must BE male? What happened to dismantling assumptions about traditionally gendered behaviours?


i do not know what has been happening in gender studies in recent years. For all i know you are right. i am not your foil in this argument. i was making a point about how the departments arose, why masculinity studies emerged and were seen as important.

[Kobi]

I am very grateful for this dialogue. It is giving words to what I have been feeling internally. It has felt very important to me to reclaim female, woman, feminism, and lesbianism in their purest forms. Now I am beginning to grasp why it is so important to me.

Has feminism as a social movement died? Turned into a debate with competing theories? There must be some group, somewhere that is action oriented.

[Heart]

Kobi, feminism never died and there are many many feminists and feminist groups engaged in action across the globe.

Start with Amnesty International, http://www.amnesty.org/en/campaigns/stop-violence-against-women, and take a look at the book I have linked in my sig line (by Nick Kristof, a feminist man).

I understand the urge, but I don't think a "pure" form of feminism exists. As has been talked about, feminism as a movement has been guilty of racism, classism, even misogyny. No social movement is without its serious blind spots and drawbacks. None can be glorified.

Heart

[Reader]

I am very grateful for this dialogue. It is giving words to what I have been feeling internally. It has felt very important to me to reclaim female, woman, feminism, and lesbianism in their purest forms. Now I am beginning to grasp why it is so important to me.

Has feminism as a social movement died? Turned into a debate with competing theories? There must be some group, somewhere that is action oriented.





Great post. Just the other day I was thinking about NOW and wondering if there even was a chapter nearby any longer. I happen to think that, globally speaking, there is a war raging against women that almost no one is acknowledging.

Does anyone even know who Gloria Steinem is? Or that ERA has nothing to do with baseball or real estate? Anyone remember the Lesbian Herstory Archives? How about "Sisterhood is Powerful"?

The right has so bastardized the term Feminist that many refuse to ID as a feminist, even though they believe in feminist ideals...as long as you don't call it "feminist". Argh.

[Reader]

Kobi, feminism never died and there are many many feminists and feminist groups engaged in action across the globe.

Start with Amnesty International, http://www.amnesty.org/en/campaigns/stop-violence-against-women, and take a look at the book I have linked in my sig line (by Nick Kristof, a feminist man).

I understand the urge, but I don't think a "pure" form of feminism exists. As has been talked about, feminism as a movement has been guilty of racism, classism, even misogyny. No social movement is without its serious blind spots and drawbacks. None can be glorified.

Heart

I also agree with some things you said, Heart, but it seems as though the right has succeeded in its attempt to divide and conquer.

[Kobi]

Thanks for the links.

I am having a bit of trouble articulating what i am looking for.

The purity I am seeking isnt in a movement per se. It is purity in getting back to myself. Have had to compromise a bit much of myself of late. I was referring to getting back to my roots.







Kobi, feminism never died and there are many many feminists and feminist groups engaged in action across the globe.

Start with Amnesty International, http://www.amnesty.org/en/campaigns/stop-violence-against-women, and take a look at the book I have linked in my sig line (by Nick Kristof, a feminist man).

I understand the urge, but I don't think a "pure" form of feminism exists. As has been talked about, feminism as a movement has been guilty of racism, classism, even misogyny. No social movement is without its serious blind spots and drawbacks. None can be glorified.

Heart

[Chazz]

I also agree with some things you said, Heart, but it seems as though the right has succeeded in its attempt to divide and conquer.


Hi, Hunter Green. I'm glad you joined the conversation.

It's not just the "right" who has succeeded in its attempts to divide and conquer. We've done it to ourselves by placing certain subjects off limits for discussion. It's as Heart said:


....gender theory, at least as enacted in queer communities, seems to lack any political analysis of institutionalized power....

There is is no analysis of institutionalized power in gender theory.

Analysis of gender theory isn't tolerated in most quarters.


Those who began by investigating the construct of maleness seem to have ended by fetishizing it instead. It's quite clear to me that although the intent may have once been to destabilize the gender binary, gender studies have had great success in promoting it....

As if there wasn't enough fetishizing of maleness to begin with ! ! ! ! :seeingstars:

Creating terms like "masculine of center" does not destabilize the gender binary, it reinforces it. How many people outside of the LGBTQ community (or, inside of it for that matter) make a distinction between maleness and masculine? I mean, REALLY.


...Is there something transgressive about a female bodied person claiming that they are male because they resemble traditional males? Isn't that just saying that those who look and act traditionally male must BE male? What happened to dismantling assumptions about traditionally gendered behaviours?....

This statement cuts to the core of the issue, doesn't it....

In the absence of a epistemological consideration of gender theory, all that can be said of it is that it's a self-justifying, inaccessible, meme that reinforces stereotypes. There is nothing remotely transgressive about that.


meme = information held in an individual's mind, which is passed on to another individual's mind.

Epistemology is the branch of philosophy that studies knowledge. It attempts to answer the basic question: what distinguishes true (adequate) knowledge from false (inadequate) knowledge?

[Chazz]

CherylNYC, I, too, have been a gender transgressor my entire life.

In recent years, I've felt like an exile caught in the cross hairs of two competing, though disconcertingly similar, gender binaries - hetero-normity and queer-normity.

If hetero-patriarchists and queer theorists, alike, see me as transgressive because of my buzz cut, skinny jeans and Harley boots.... where do I go to be seen as gender congruent woman?

[Chazz]

How does BF play into these gender roles?

It's difficult to dismantle what we seem to play into.

This is a worthy question, Apocalipstic.

As a lesbian woman with a Feminist sensibility, I don't see me "playing into" anything. There is no place in my relationships for misogyny of any kind.

But I completely see that discussions about gender analysis do nothing to help the issues facing Women eccept as it related personally.

I think gender analysis has it's place, but not to the exclusion of everything else women and other disenfranchised people face.

[Reader]

SNIP I can't speak for Kobi, but I can say unequivocally that when I use the word 'lesbian' to identify myself I have been met with some hostility from people who, in another time and place, would have certainly been called lesbians, and probably would have called themselves lesbians. In some circles, including b-f communities, calling oneself a lesbian is considered uncool, a relic from former times... SNIP

I could not help but recall the term "Lavender Menace" after reading this.

[Heart]

Great post. Just the other day I was thinking about NOW and wondering if there even was a chapter nearby any longer. I happen to think that, globally speaking, there is a war raging against women that almost no one is acknowledging.

Does anyone even know who Gloria Steinem is? Or that ERA has nothing to do with baseball or real estate? Anyone remember the Lesbian Herstory Archives? How about "Sisterhood is Powerful"?

The right has so bastardized the term Feminist that many refuse to ID as a feminist, even though they believe in feminist ideals...as long as you don't call it "feminist". Argh.

Well... I don't want to be oppositional, but NOW is one of those organizations that really had to work through its own homophobia and racism. NOW did not originally consider the voices of lesbians or women of color. In fact, the Lavender Menace was formed in 1970 to protest the exclusion of queer women from the feminist movement. Many feminists of Color are still having to carve out a voice in the feminist movement, especially in relation to issues of poverty. Femininsm is a notoriously white middle/upper-class movement.

I respect Gloria Steinem, but as recently as our last presidential election she wrote an editorial that constructed some problematic comparisons between Clinton and Obama in terms of which is worse - sexism or racism, and totally ignored the existance of women of color who deal with both. (Oppression olympics is a very bad idea.)

Nonetheless, NOW is still active and there is an upcoming PBS special about Steinem that I'm looking forward to seeing.

Don't get me wrong -- I'm a fierce feminist -- it's perhaps the most relevant social movement on the planet, but I feel that its important to keep a critical perspective.

Heart

[dreadgeek]

Those who began by investigating the construct of maleness seem to have ended by fetishizing it instead. It's quite clear to me that although the intent may have once been to destabilise the gender binary, gender studies have had great success in promoting it.

Is there something transgressive about a female bodied person claiming that they are male because they resemble traditional males? Isn't that just saying that those who look and act traditionally male must BE male? What happened to dismantling assumptions about traditionally gendered behaviours?



I see a great deal of this. The construct, within gender studies, is that if a woman likes, for instance, trucks, baseball, fishing, beer and power tools that person is 'masculine of center'. If said person then goes ahead and transitions, this is supposed to be transgressive and demolishing the gender binary. How is it though since it appears to recapitulate the existing gender construction of male = trucks, sports, fishing, beer and tools?

I would argue, like you do, Cheryl that I am transgressing gender boundaries/roles because, even though my passions lie in typically 'male' things such as the physical sciences, Linux and the Free/Open Source Software movement generally, skepticism and a certain holding to living my life rationally none of that makes me 'male' or 'masculine'. The problem, in other words, does not lie in my being a woman who is a geek rather, it lies in society defining certain things which are not really gendered as having gender traits. I don't 'think like a man', I think like a scientist.

Kobi, feminism never died and there are many many feminists and feminist groups engaged in action across the globe.

Start with Amnesty International, http://www.amnesty.org/en/campaigns/stop-violence-against-women, and take a look at the book I have linked in my sig line (by Nick Kristof, a feminist man).

I understand the urge, but I don't think a "pure" form of feminism exists. As has been talked about, feminism as a movement has been guilty of racism, classism, even misogyny. No social movement is without its serious blind spots and drawbacks. None can be glorified.

Heart

This is merely to say that feminism is a movement made of people who came to feminism with their own predilections and cultural baggage intact. Given the time period where NOW was formed, it would have been remarkable if feminism had *not* had a non-trivial amount of racism, certainly, and homophobia. This is not to excuse anything, it is merely to remind that people are products--to some greater or lesser degree--of their time and the movements they spawn are also products of that time.

Cheers
Aj

[CherylNYC]

I see a great deal of this. The construct, within gender studies, is that if a woman likes, for instance, trucks, baseball, fishing, beer and power tools that person is 'masculine of center'. If said person then goes ahead and transitions, this is supposed to be transgressive and demolishing the gender binary. How is it though since it appears to recapitulate the existing gender construction of male = trucks, sports, fishing, beer and tools?

I would argue, like you do, Cheryl that I am transgressing gender boundaries/roles because, even though my passions lie in typically 'male' things such as the physical sciences, Linux and the Free/Open Source Software movement generally, skepticism and a certain holding to living my life rationally none of that makes me 'male' or 'masculine'. The problem, in other words, does not lie in my being a woman who is a geek rather, it lies in society defining certain things which are not really gendered as having gender traits. I don't 'think like a man', I think like a scientist....


Cheers
Aj

This is one of the most obvious contradictions of the gender theory bandwagon. I shake my head in disbelief every time I meet a young person who I would peg as butch, who I find claims a male ID and then talks about how transgressive it is to do so. The young person inevitably then goes on to try to prove how 'male' they are by enumerating all of the ways they fit into a traditionally male stereotype. I think it must be a case of the Emperor's new clothes that others fail to point out the obvious.

This is a subject near and dear to me. That said, I feel a little guilty going on an extended tear about the way male IDed people who, in another time, would likely have been lesbians and are now not making sense to me. No matter where my lesbian ID falls in the world of fashionable theorising, my ID isn't changing. We're talking about pride in that ID. Those who've eschewed the ID of which I'm proud may or may not make sense to me, but that doesn't change who I am.

The academic pendulum is probably swinging back. It always does. Those whose work was considered young and edgy are abandoned for the next hot theorizer. Needless to say, the new theory doesn't have to make any more sense than the old ones. It's like any other fashion, it just has to be fresh. Academics make their careers by coming up with something that seems new and interesting. That's cold comfort for a young person struggling with their ID, but I have no influence over those who treat human ID as a game through which they can make career splash. I'll just keep offering huge, loud support for butch lesbian women.

[Kobi]

Heart,

I am hoping words will not be as difficult for me today but no promises here.

To me, I remember feminism as both a macro and mirco level endeavor. Until women had "their consciousness" raised on a macro level, the mirco level of the manifestations of their oppression couldn't be put in its proper perspective or addressed on the multiple levels that would seem logical.

With people being people, I dont expect a movement as such to be immune from the foibles of being human. I also see including every single possible variation in women as statistically impossible.

Also, being people with differing realities i.e. race, religion, sexual orientation, class etc I dont expect a totally cohesive approach to anything. People are most concerned with and have an easier time relating to that which most affects them on a day to day basis.

It seems to me that sometimes we cant see the forest because our view is obscured by all the trees. The trees are very important but so is the forest. If we lose sight of the forest, how successful can the trees be?

When I do an internet search and find a lot of stuff on the trees i.e. the many ways in which sexism and misogyny is a reality for women all across the globe it is good. It seems to me, we have become very focused on the trees to the detriment of the forest.

The divisiveness is a boon to that which you are ultimately fighting against.

When I do a search on the forest and am drawing, to me, a blank, I get concerned. When gender theory, which seems very male oriented to me, seeks to surpass or undermine feminism, I get concerned.

In the same way, I get concerned when I cant find "womanspace". I define this as a place when women go to be with other women period.

I see a lot of effort directed at cooperation, compromise, lets all be one happy family. It sets off all kinds of red flags for me.

We, as women, have a very complex, complicated and funky coexistence with all things male or masculine. There is a very different dynamic between women exchanging energy in a butch femme community, and the male-female energy exchange in the same community. The mixture leads, to me, to a different dynamic for everyone invloved. And, it feels odd.

When I see "lesbian" websites welcoming males - not just transmen but heterosexual cismen, it makes me wonder. When I see chat rooms owned by young gay women open to gay, lesbian, straight...I wonder. When I see young women who seem ok calling themselves gay but are hesistant to call themselves lesbian, I wonder.

There is something very wonky going on. And, from where I stand, it doesnt bode well for women or feminism or lesbianism given the direction it is going.

Seems to me, it is time to reclaim a lot of things, refocus on women, revisit consciousness raising, and just get back on track.

[AtLast]

I see a great deal of this. The construct, within gender studies, is that if a woman likes, for instance, trucks, baseball, fishing, beer and power tools that person is 'masculine of center'. If said person then goes ahead and transitions, this is supposed to be transgressive and demolishing the gender binary. How is it though since it appears to recapitulate the existing gender construction of male = trucks, sports, fishing, beer and tools?

I would argue, like you do, Cheryl that I am transgressing gender boundaries/roles because, even though my passions lie in typically 'male' things such as the physical sciences, Linux and the Free/Open Source Software movement generally, skepticism and a certain holding to living my life rationally none of that makes me 'male' or 'masculine'. The problem, in other words, does not lie in my being a woman who is a geek rather, it lies in society defining certain things which are not really gendered as having gender traits. I don't 'think like a man', I think like a scientist.



This is merely to say that feminism is a movement made of people who came to feminism with their own predilections and cultural baggage intact. Given the time period where NOW was formed, it would have been remarkable if feminism had *not* had a non-trivial amount of racism, certainly, and homophobia. This is not to excuse anything, it is merely to remind that people are products--to some greater or lesser degree--of their time and the movements they spawn are also products of that time.
Cheers
Aj

Concerning racial variables with the Second Wave, I continue to be baffled at how our historical minds stop at these initial flawas instead of going further-

Many women of color took issue with the white, middle-class influence at that time with the movement and were very outspoken. They then brought issues of women of color to the discussion and widened (thankfully) this discussion and have since been a major force in feminist theory. This brought brown women to the table as well.

Social movements do exactly this- bring all of the variables out that need to be addressed. They are not static, nor are they perfect- just like individual people. Consciousness at one level gives rise to consciousness at other levels. Growth happens this way.

Yes, given the times (as was true of the First Wave), it was an imperfect movement. Yet, it gave rise to all voices because those voices realized there was a space in which to speak.

I get so tired of historical cherry picking. History needs to be studied with a fluid and open mind. I stood with many WOC "back then" that needed to add to the conversation and give it breadth. Actually, there were many WOC in the early days that spoke up.

[Heart]

Right AJ, I was not at all suggesting that I expect feminism as a movement to be free of warts, nor was I suggesting that WOC have not spoken up and come to the table. But I do feel a mite nervous when we start to get all nostalgic for the "good ol' days" of the 2nd Wave.

Heart

[*Anya*]

"Because women's work is never done and is underpaid or unpaid or boring or repetitious and we're the first to get fired and what we look like is more important than what we do and if we get raped it's our fault and if we get beaten we must have provoked it and if we raise our voices we're nagging bitches and if we enjoy sex we're nymphos and if we don't we're frigid and if we love women it's because we can't get a "real" man and if we ask our doctor too many questions we're neurotic and/or pushy and if we expect childcare we're selfish and if we stand up for our rights we're aggressive and "unfeminine" and if we don't we're typical weak females and if we want to get married we're out to trap a man and if we don't we're unnatural and if we can't cope or don't want a pregnancy we're made to feel guilty about abortion and...for lots of other reasons we are part of the women's liberation movement."

~Author unknown, quoted in The Torch, 14 September 1987