Reclaiming Lesbian Pride

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by citybutch

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

http://writingforstrangers.com/writi...emme-identity/

Originally Posted by 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.h...ures_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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by Martina

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]

Originally Posted by CherylNYC

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]

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by Heart

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]

Originally Posted by Medusa

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]

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

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by ScandalAndy

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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.