In Celebration of Butch Femininity

[Selenay]

Originally Posted by tapu

tapu's dictionary:

Got a pussy? Like pussy exclusively? Yer a lesbian.

My sexuality is not based around my, or anyone else's, underwear stuffing.

[tapu]

Originally Posted by Selenay

My sexuality is not based around my, or anyone else's, underwear stuffing.

Okay, give me your basic definition of the English language word lesbian.

Just give us at this point where to start: those semantic features that are necessary and sufficient to add up to "lesbian"

[Martina]

Tapu, please do not use the reputation comments to me to post critical/unfriendly remarks. My understanding is that that is against the TOS.

[tapu]

Originally Posted by Martina

Tapu, please do not use the reputation comments to me to post critical/unfriendly remarks. My understanding is that that is against the TOS.

Yes, maam, just didn't want to make that remark public since it was just to you.

But I'll read up on TOS before I post anything to or near you again.

[Martina]

We should just ignore her. This is what happens so often. You are having a serious discussion, and a crackpot comes in and pushes everyone's buttons and derails it. She's having a good time, but everyone else is not.

[tapu]

Originally Posted by Martina

We should just ignore her. This is what happens so often. You are having a serious discussion, and a crackpot comes in and pushes everyone's buttons and derails it. She's having a good time, but everyone else is not.

Gosh, Martina, was it something I said?

Please take your personal vendetta private or away, and discuss only the topic here. There must be something in the TOS about that.

[tapu]

Some might do well to reread my definition and not saddle it with connotation.

For example, "like pussy exclusively" does not entail any nuances of "has to enjoy having hers touched," "has to touch it to like it."

Also, a MTF trans qualifies if they have a pussy.

Hey, words DO have meanings. Otherwise, this would be Babel....

[stargazingboi]

Originally Posted by tapu

Some might do well to reread my definition and not saddle it with connotation.

For example, "like pussy exclusively" does not entail any nuances of "has to enjoy having hers touched," "has to touch it to like it."

Also, a MTF trans qualifies if they have a pussy.

Hey, words DO have meanings. Otherwise, this would be Babel....

I can't agree with the MTF only qualifying if she has a "pussy"...she qualifies because she is a woman..period

[tapu]

Originally Posted by stargazingboi

I can't agree with the MTF only qualifying if she has a "pussy"...she qualifies because she is a woman..period

I understand the pull to include MTF and FTM both as lesbians, but you must admit that they seem like they form a subcategory or a caveat to the definition of lesbian, as it means in the general parlance.

I don't mind people stepping outside the parlance. Matter of fact I honor it directly and personally with some MTF's I know. But they are special categories to "lesbian." The unmarked form does not include them.

[weatherboi]

Originally Posted by C0LLETTE

So far what I've noticed in reading here is that some people have been offended, even hurt, by what some other people or groups have said. Some friends have been lost, some made; but what I don't see is anyone saying they changed who they were or wanted to be because of what was said. Can make you wonder how deep this all really runs.

On a more personal note:
I started to write a small history of how I came to this site and why I'm still wandering around with bullet holes in my back from my first days here in chat. In the midst of that, I received an email which I'll quote here:

"In my heart I am not a failure or a loser.
Not asking for a magic wand. I get up and wait in county lines for aid or food 4 hours sometimes 6 a day.
I am hungry and hopeless.
Medi-care is causing me to start all over again.My medication i need was denied . I am fighting it and have a state hearing . another nightmare. tirred. i am so tired.
i need help from you, but understand
i liked hearing your voice today"

And that's where I lost my train of thought in this thread.

Originally Posted by weatherboi

Are you saying someone asked you for money???

Originally Posted by C0LLETTE

If that is what you got from my post then I obviously need to stop posting here.

If you are speaking to me


"i need help from you, but understand i liked hearing your voice today"
I can empathize with what comes before this one sentence then I am distracted by what feels to me like a play for emotional drainage or a play for money. I have seen it a lot in the online community so it is a red flag to me. I was concerned for you, nothing more.

I just want to point out I feel your response to me to be short, dismissive, and insinuates that I am not "getting it". That is no way to have a reasonable conversation and totally goes against what we are trying to accomplish here.

[C0LLETTE]

Originally Posted by weatherboi

If you are speaking to me


"i need help from you, but understand i liked hearing your voice today"
I can empathize with what comes before this one sentence then I am distracted by what feels to me like a play for emotional drainage or a play for money. I have seen it a lot in the online community so it is a red flag to me. I was concerned for you, nothing more.

I just want to point out I feel your response to me to be short, dismissive, and insinuates that I am not "getting it". That is no way to have a reasonable conversation and totally goes against what we are trying to accomplish here.

Thank you for your concern weatherboi and I apologise for having misinterpreted your response which I found "short, dismissive and insinuate(ing). I do wish to have "a reasonable conversation" and would never want to "totally (go) against what we are trying to accomplish here".

In an effort to avoid being further ostracised from that "we", I am now disengaging from this issue with you.

[Selenay]

Originally Posted by tapu

Okay, give me your basic definition of the English language word lesbian.

Just give us at this point where to start: those semantic features that are necessary and sufficient to add up to "lesbian"

I'd be happy to, but hopefully this will end the discourse, since we've now moved off topic.

I prefer to use legitimate definitions when making sweeping statements about the definitions of others sexuality, so I've chosen to use the Oxford Dictionary definition:
a homosexual woman.

Now, I like to do my due diligence, so let's check out the definition of homosexual:
(of a person) sexually attracted to people of one’s own sex.

But that's tricky, because sex and gender are not necessarily the same thing, and while the OED has a whole discussion on the difference between sex and gender, I think this discussion is off-topic enough. While I'd be thrilled to engage with you further about what "makes" someone a lesbian, this is neither the time nor place to do so.

[tapu]

Originally Posted by Selenay

I'd be happy to, but hopefully this will end the discourse, since we've now moved off topic.

I prefer to use legitimate definitions when making sweeping statements about the definitions of others sexuality, so I've chosen to use the Oxford Dictionary definition:
a homosexual woman.

Now, I like to do my due diligence, so let's check out the definition of homosexual:
(of a person) sexually attracted to people of one’s own sex.

But that's tricky, because sex and gender are not necessarily the same thing, and while the OED has a whole discussion on the difference between sex and gender, I think this discussion is off-topic enough. While I'd be happy to engage with you further about what "makes" someone a lesbian, this is neither the time nor place to do so.

Guess you get the last word.

[Kobi]

One of the saddest things in the world to me, is female to female misogyny. It is drilled into us from birth. We are taught that it is up to women to police other women. We are taught when a woman or group of women threaten to upset the status quo they must be silenced by any means possible.

Well done. The patriarchy is very proud of you.

[The_Lady_Snow]

Originally Posted by Kobi

One of the saddest things in the world to me, is female to female misogyny. It is drilled into us from birth. We are taught that it is up to women to police other women. We are taught when a woman or group of women threaten to upset the status quo they must be silenced by any means possible.

Well done. The patriarchy is very proud of you.

Does this statement apply to you as we'll? Thanks you for clarifying ahead of time.

[Martina]

Originally Posted by Kobi

One of the saddest things in the world to me, is female to female misogyny. It is drilled into us from birth. We are taught that it is up to women to police other women. We are taught when a woman or group of women threaten to upset the status quo they must be silenced by any means possible.

Well done. The patriarchy is very proud of you.

If I criticize another woman, that does not make it misogyny. I still think that holding up Megan Ellison as some kind of example is highly questionable. I have class politics too. It's not all about feminism all the time. And being a feminist doesn't mean you abandon reason and support all women regardless. There are some bad women out there.

How would we criticize Michelle Bachman or Megyn Kelly's insanity if we never questioned a word spoken by another woman?

[Medusa]

I'd like to add something, if I may.

First, this is not meant as patronizing at all but I truly need to say that this might have been one of the best debates I've seen on this site in a while. Not because it is without clash, but because I see folks truly trying to have a conversation. This is a tough one, no doubt, but I believe there has been positive movement in how we discuss this issue on this site. (Yes, "this issue" being Lesbian-bashing and gender intersections.)

Also, I'd like to give voice to the fact that I, too, do not want to see this site turn into open season on Lesbians. I identify as a Lesbian and this is my space too. Many people here do identify as a Lesbian or have identified as Lesbians in their gender history so I'd hate to see that level of vilification turned inward.

I think the thing that is important to remember is that everyone of every gender on this site has a history, both with themselves and with people and groups of other genders. I think we can all agree that our experiences color the way we see people and thus, can lead to prejudices, stereotyping, and labeling people against their consent.
Are we wrong to develop prejudices toward other people or groups of people? The short and politically correct answer would be YES!!!!
The truth, though, is that this happens sometimes whether we want it to or not.
I don't believe for one second that there is a single person on this site who has never looked at a Fat person and thought their fatness was "gross" or that they were "smelly" or looked at a group of Black males walking down the road at night and clutched their purse or made fun of "little people" or thought that a High Femme was "playacting" or thought that an old person probably didn't have sex any more or insert any number of bullshit things that can go through the heads of human beings when they are young or unevolved or low-level thinkers or hell, when they've not checked their prejudices.
These are, of course, extreme examples but I'm trying to illustrate that every one of us has some level of context about other groups that we may need to work on.

And why did I illustrate with such extreme examples? Because these are things that I can think of that we could form prejudices on that MAY IN FACT have some truth or history behind them.

For example, don't tell me that every single fat person in this world smells like a rose because we all know that's bullshit. Why? Because not every HUMAN BEING smells like a rose.
Don't tell me that a group of Black males walking down the road at night has NEVER grabbed a woman's purse. Why? Because HUMAN BEINGS in groups have grabbed women's purses.
Don't tell me that every person over 80 is still having sex. Why? Because some HUMAN BEINGS over 80 can't or won't or don't want to.

This is clumsy of me but I'm trying to say that when people give examples of things that have happened to them by Lesbians or Transmen or Femmes or Butches and then someone from the group that the example was given of comes in and tries to basically re-write history and say that it has NEVERRRRRRR been that way, IT. MAKES. ME. CRAZY.

Because an attempt to sterilize real, live experiences so that people can feel better about their own personal identity is complete and utter BULLSHIT and it's a waste of time on these threads. And you know what else it is? It's a fucking LIE.

If a Stone Butch comes on and and says "I've had several Femmes try to penetrate me against my will. WTF is that?" and some Stone Femmes come back in the thread and basically try to tell that Butch they are offended and that it never happend and "Femmes don't do that" then, inevitably, start reporting posts and finger-waggling about how we are allowing "Stone Femme-bashing", it feels like we are being asked to participate in magical thinking.

I have felt that way a couple of times with "Lesbian-bashing" concerns, just as I have with "Trans-bashing" and even "woman-bashing" in general. (using quotes to distinguish language that has become part of our dictionary here, not because I don't believe in it or that it happens)

Conversly, people sometimes need to do a little work around how they talk about their history here. Not cool to be all "most Femmes do x, y, z" or "Back when I was 20, most Butches were this, this, or this".
Still, I submit that generalizing is sometimes the language that people have and while it may suck and piss us off, it is OFTEN valuable to listen to what is being said versus HOW it is being said. I'm always curious how people got to the opinion that a group of human beings thousands of people deep are all "insert attribute here".

Doesn't mean we don't get to call people out when they made ridiculous statements and it certainly doesnt mean we need to put up with any bull where stereotypes are held up as the "truth". I'd just like to think we can move forward, not even necessarily while agreeing with one another, if we concede that everyone is coming from a different place, all funnelled into this weird-ass little microchasm that has a long, entrenched history of gobbledygook that we've learned and unlearned a thousand times.

I personally struggled with creating a Lesbian "zone" on this site. In my mind, this entire site is a Lesbian zone and I felt that the zone was privileged or even separatist in that I felt it tried to divest itself of the yin and yang of what makes this site space special (that of honoring the Butch-and-Femme-as-Nouns dynamic).
And this is where my own history of being around Lesbian separatists who wanted nothing to do with Butch/Femme/Trans or even women with any level of masculinity intersected with my "zone" feelings. So, this is me giving a live example of how our histories and lived experience sometimes inform us unfairly or fairly, depending on how you process it.

Anyway, I'm rambling and forgot my point here but I'd like to keep going in this thread in all of its winding roads. Good discussion.