Reclaiming Lesbian Pride

[Chazz]

Originally Posted by CherylNYC

The part that's problematic is that I've met many transwoman who do not. So has A. The half dozen transwomen I knew before I met A had been fully socialised as men, and it showed. They fulfilled all my worst expectations by using typically male power grabs in meetings of our women's groups. Some felt that the loudest voice always prevails. One bullied and abused her tiny wife. One was very adept at conspicuously throwing her money around with the expectation that it would purchase agreement. Yes, I know that women sometimes do these things. I'm talking about people who do these things [B]BECAUSE it's part of their socialised male behaviour patterns. Did these transwomen look like invading men to me? You bet. [Hence my reference to 'once men'.]

My good friend A actually never blamed me for those feelings when I confessed them to her. She told me that she's been equally horrified by male socialised behaviours she sees some transwomen exhibiting [hence my reference to 'once men'] , and she worries that others will judge her based on their poor behaviour. She calls it "privilege in a dress".

As Aj wrote, the ticket to that acceptance has been current gender theory. The part that both A and I find mind boggling is that current gender theory is erasing of women, lesbians, and our lesbian feminist history. We both feel strongly that there's a difference between women and men, [hence my reference to once men] but that makes us hopeless dinosaurs. Oh, and it makes us transphobes, too. She has been called a transphobe and a token by women who have never been trans. True story. Out of respect for A's wishes I didn't kick anyone's ass, but I'm still seething about it.

Because I need safe space, because I'm a lesbian and a feminist, because I care about our culture and our hard-won space, I'll continue to guard it. That means that when I encounter men claiming to be women I'll question their presence in my women's groups. (A very tall and large man who wore the same clothes he always did, went to the same barber he always did, and changed NOT ONE SINGLE THING about himself to signal to the world that he might be trans, or anything other than a man, while claiming that he felt like a woman. He demanded access and got it. A was chagrined, as was I.) I don't want male crossdressers, who are now claiming to be trans, at my women's sex parties. (Ask me how I felt about the crossdresser with his otherwise naked dick tied up in a bow, who had to get in my face while I was in a compromised position at a women's play party last year.) [This happens a lot. I've been at several explicitly lesbian "parties" where this has happened.]

The reason that the man who claimed to be a woman could do so is because current gender theory tells him that he's any gender he wakes up feeling on any given day. He maintained that he was a woman if he said he was one, and no hormones, surgery, or changes in any part of his outward body or dress were necessary for him to have access to women's space. That really pissed me off. [Hence my reference to 'once men'.]

The reason that the very male crossdresser who came to the women's play party was allowed to remain was because he said he was trans. The party organisor is a committed trans advocate, and she was pretty irritated by this man's presence. Even though she felt strongly that he didn't belong, she told me that she feared backlash from the trans community for excluding anyone who said he was trans. That really pissed me off, too.

I want my safety to be as important as the safety of people with penises. Why is that so hard?

It's hard because certain things have been placed off limits for discussion by trans/gender ideologues.

Trans/gender canon dictates there are only two options: transphobe or transphile (anything in between qualifies for the former).... Questioning or challenging trans/gender ideology or behavior without genuflecting, toe dancing, mincing words or straddling gets you pegged a transphobe (hater/bigot). Your friend A, CherylNYC, must not have genuflected deep enough.

I could argue that my questioning, even criticizing, trans/gender ideology/behavior is not motivated by hate, but arguing sacred canon with ideologues, or fundamentalists, is never fruitful. They may preach: “Hate the sin, not the sinner”, but they rarely practice it…. More importantly, arguing would be me lending credence to a false accusation. A false accusation that is typically used by trans/gender ideologues to derail conversations and discredit lesbians/Feminists who do not embrace trans/gender ideology. So, I’ll just shrug and say: “Your” canon hurts women who share my sensibilities. That doesn’t automatically qualify “you” as a lesbianphobe in my book, but I could be persuaded.

Part of the reason this thread was created – at least so I was led to believe – was because many lesbians feel minimized, marginalized, invisiblized and their identities cannibalized. It may hurt to hear that, it may offend your ideological sensibilities. It may make you want to kick me to the curb - you can do that, you have the power - but, in so doing, you’re ignoring the perennial elephant in the room. The one that is at the core of the divisiveness in the LGBTQ community of which there is much.

How can anyone expect to have a meaningful, reality based conversation about Lesbian Pride when only one ideology is allowed to be voiced? (A nod to Heart who is, in her way, trying to bridge the ideological divide.)

What do some of you think is really at the core of the BV debacle? Bad nomenclature? Bad judgment? A failed attempt at being all inclusive? Good intentions gone awry?

It's about: I D E O L O G Y

You can debate BV's nonprofit status and financial statements till the cows do what they do, but some of us view the BV hierarchy as staging an ideological takeover. The next, inevitable slip, slide down the trans/gender ideological continuum; a trip many of us do not want to take. Based on the conversations I’ve been having with other lesbians about this thread, many see it as I do - one more exercise (perhaps unconscious, maybe and sometimes) in imposing trans/gender ideology on everyone in the community.

This is what it comes down to…. Is questioning trans/gender ideology, politics and behavior off the table? If not, who gets to set the parameters of that discussion - trans/gender ideologues? If the answer is a dogma laden, qualified “YES”, then the L in the LGBTQ panoply is no longer inclusive or meaningful. Let's just be honest and reality based about it.