Men with boobs.

[Heart]

Originally Posted by Cyclopea

I don't think it matters who Nixon is or what she said- I think Heart just used that as a good example to start a discussion on the language surrounding female masculinity...

Bingo. Yes, I care about the language/intentions/limitations/biases and assumptions that exist around female identities. And I'm pretty amazed at some of expressions of indifference, that make this just a personal matter. Would you have the same attitude if say, Chaz Bono's partner referred to him publicly as "a man with a vagina?" Would that be seen as just a personal, off-the-cuff, cute attempt at explaining the identity of a transman?

[Corkey]

Personally I could give a rats azz what a so called celeb says about anything, they aren't what make my world go round. Chaz included.

[Soon]

Because there are precious few images/couples that publicly reflect my experiences, I AM interested in how these relationships are presented/defined/articulated and people's responses. (the general public as well as those from within our community)

It's like looking at images and reading about B/F stories and histories from the past (which are fascinating and validating at times). I am interested in today's public figures who are part of the queer community and how they present or identify and how society responds to them.

[Lusciousblondefemme]

Ok call me slow or something .. but I am still trying to figure out where this comment comes into being misogynist, homophobic or sexist?

So she called her partner a little man with boobs... who is that actually hurting?
You can not say that it is hurting the gay community because honestly I know alot of WOMEN who are butches who have boobs and when they get called Sir or young man they do not automatically say oh shit that was hurtful because you are homophobic, sexist or a misogynist.

Unfortunately in this day and age to sit and worry about what someone who is famous is saying about her partner is redundant. Sometimes I think that people look for things to explain the way society is and guess what there is nothing that can explain the way people think. I say that because not all people are the same. Everyone thinks the things they want because of their own experiences or what they were taught or showed through life. I actually laughed when I read that comment because I thought of how my ex always gets called young man. We always laugh about it because when she turns around and they see her chest they apologize profusely to her for the mistake.

Unfortunately when people look at a person and only see them from the neck up and see short hair yes they will assume that they are a man, but that doesn't automatically make them a horrible person.

I understand that maybe you do not like what was said but honestly that will have very little to do with the way people still think about gay people. That comment isn't going to make them change their ways and think something else.

We are fighting for our rights of equality and in that unfortunately sometimes you have to take the good with the bad this comment did not set the gay community back at all.

I actually think that it might make people think twice about automatically thinking that someone is a man when they take a first glance at them.

It brought to the front that fact that some women do have short hair and do ID as something other than a woman.

I mean if you are going to say anything then look into what others say..
I watched the Wanda Sykes special on HBO the other night ..
When she was describing her wife she said "I always say she is french, because it is better then saying she is white." Should we attack her for being prejudice to white people? No that is just how she describes her partner and as long as the partner is not insulted by what was said what right do we have to be upset by what she said?

My question is Would you feel the same way if you heard some gay man describe their partner as a fairy or the more flamboyant one? If you are willing to sit and discuss this silly comment are you willing to say that you would be the same with gay men as well. Because after all we are all in this fight together to be understood and excepted.

[Heart]

Here's how its sexist: it implies that a woman can't be masculine, that to be masculine you can only be described as a man. It implies that women can only be feminine. That's a sexist viewpoint in that it limits the definition of woman.

Here's how its homophobic: it implies that a gay woman is really a man wanna-be, a man with boobs, rather than what she is - a lesbian, dyke, queer, butch woman. That's a homophobic viewpoint in that it denigrates queer female identities

Here's how its misogynistic: it puts the value/emphasis on male (masculine equals man/male) and devalues the femaleness inherent in the identity. That's a misogynistic viewpoint in that it devalues femaleness and privileges maleness,

Voila!

[Corkey]

Originally Posted by Heart

Here's how its sexist: it implies that a woman can't be masculine, that to be masculine you can only be described as a man. It implies that women can only be feminine. That's a sexist viewpoint in that it limits the definition of woman.

Here's how its homophobic: it implies that a gay woman is really a man wanna-be, a man with boobs, rather than what she is - a lesbian, dyke, queer, butch woman. That's a homophobic viewpoint in that it denigrates queer female identities

Here's how its misogynistic: it puts the value/emphasis on male (masculine equals man/male) and devalues the femaleness inherent in the identity. That's a misogynistic viewpoint in that it devalues femaleness and privileges maleness,

Voila!

Her words were about her lover, not about anyone else, you aren't in her head and as such cannot confirm any such phobia to her words. You take what you want to hear and run with all this hysteria, it's ludicrous. If her lover isn't insulted then why are you? It isn't your place to be insulted for her.

[Cyclopea]

Originally Posted by Corkey

Her words were about her lover, not about anyone else, you aren't in her head and as such cannot confirm any such phobia to her words. You take what you want to hear and run with all this hysteria, it's ludicrous. If her lover isn't insulted then why are you? It isn't your place to be insulted for her.

Why are women "ludicrous" and "hysterical" for wanting to discuss the limited language used to describe female masculinity?

[Corkey]

Originally Posted by Cyclopea

Why are women "ludicrous" and "hysterical" for wanting to discuss the limited language used to describe female masculinity?

This isn't worth a response. It's inflammatory. She isn't discussing she is insinuating. Frankly I'm done with it.

[Admin]

Originally Posted by Corkey

Her words were about her lover, not about anyone else, you aren't in her head and as such cannot confirm any such phobia to her words. You take what you want to hear and run with all this hysteria, it's ludicrous. If her lover isn't insulted then why are you? It isn't your place to be insulted for her.

Hey Corkey,

Just wanted to clarify a little something here. Words like "hysteria" and "ludicrous" in this context and discussion can feel like a personal attack when we are referencing how a female person perceives the situation.
I don't think you were saying that a specific person was "hysterical" or "ludicrous" but I do want us all to be mindful of using loaded language in these discussions.

So far, this discussion has been really good and I'm glad to see folks expressing their opinions in healthy ways. Let's keep it on that level.

Thanks all,
Admin

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by Heart

Here's how its sexist: it implies that a woman can't be masculine, that to be masculine you can only be described as a man. It implies that women can only be feminine. That's a sexist viewpoint in that it limits the definition of woman.

Here's how its homophobic: it implies that a gay woman is really a man wanna-be, a man with boobs, rather than what she is - a lesbian, dyke, queer, butch woman. That's a homophobic viewpoint in that it denigrates queer female identities

Here's how its misogynistic: it puts the value/emphasis on male (masculine equals man/male) and devalues the femaleness inherent in the identity. That's a misogynistic viewpoint in that it devalues femaleness and privileges maleness,

Voila!

Hm. I dont understand the leap from how one persons description of her partner translates into these points.

Do you really believe saying a partner is a man with boobs or a man with a vagina really fits these points?

I am back to we, as a community, cannot separate out the issues for ourselves. So, is it fair to judge people on the periphery who make off the cuff comments about their own situation and to assign our values to their words? I think not.

[Dylan]

Heart,

I totally get what you're saying, and I agree with you 100% if we're speaking generally.

Where I disagree with you 100% is that this comment was made about an individual by an individual who has wayyyyyyyy more intimate knowledge of the person in question. We have absolutely no idea how this particular couple sees themselves.

If Mahhh Woman called me a man without a penis, or a woman with boobs, or whatever, it's between us, and has nada to do with how the rest of the trans community sees the comment. It's nunya's business how Mahhh Woman and I interact with one another and how we refer to eachother.

Now, if Nixon or Mahhh Woman said it about all butches, or all transfolks, I'd have a problem with it...but she didn't.

But yeah, I totally agree with you in a generally-speaking sense.


Not That Mahhh Opinion Matters At All To You, But Jus' Sayin',
Dylan

P.S. I'd probably also feel differently if this comment had come from an activist in the community or someone of that stature...an actual 'representative' of the community...but it's just Cynthia Nixon. Like someone else mentioned, she's about as important to me as Anne Heche.

[SassyLeo]

I do agree that if her partner wants to be called this, then that it totally their business. I am not in the middle of their relationship, so maybe this is a pet name. Who knows. When it takes on the life that it has already...I think there is some responsibility...

Originally Posted by Dylan

*snip*

P.S. I'd probably also feel differently if this comment had come from an activist in the community or someone of that stature...an actual 'representative' of the community...but it's just Cynthia Nixon. Like someone else mentioned, she's about as important to me as Anne Heche.

And I differ with you here...

I think she just needs a bit of education. Sure she is not Ellen, but as a Queer person in the media, making comments, whether they are personal to her partner or not, people read them. Just as we all have here, read them and had opinions. I feel like she has at least a tiny bit of responsibility (being in the media) to help educate. Now I am not asking her to become a spokesperson for all things Queer...but...

I sort of equate it to a sports figure. I believe a sports person, say Dennis Rodman, has responsibility to not do really stupid shit. I mean we all make mistakes, but kids look up to these people and when they do stupid shit, it makes an impression.

So, again, I'm not condoning what she said... just thinking that she needs a lesson in some Queer/Gender language.

[Soon]

Originally Posted by Dylan

P.S. I'd probably also feel differently if this comment had come from an activist in the community or someone of that stature...an actual 'representative' of the community...but it's just Cynthia Nixon. Like someone else mentioned, she's about as important to me as Anne Heche.

Why the comparison to Anne Heche at all? Is it b/c this is her first queer relationship?

I'm not sure what the criteria is for activist, but she has spoken at rallies for marriage equality and has brought up the issue frequently when interviewed. Michelle Obama recently invited the both of them to the Mother's Day tea, even! Marinoni is a well known education activist in NYC.

I agree with SassyLeo regarding some responsibility and some education on her part (regardless of whether this is fine as a descriptor b/w them, it does affect others' perceptions of what it is to be butch or a masculine presenting female (which, in her description, is not a woman).

[BullDog]

Originally Posted by Dylan

Heart,

I totally get what you're saying, and I agree with you 100% if we're speaking generally.

Where I disagree with you 100% is that this comment was made about an individual by an individual who has wayyyyyyyy more intimate knowledge of the person in question. We have absolutely no idea how this particular couple sees themselves.

If Mahhh Woman called me a man without a penis, or a woman with boobs, or whatever, it's between us, and has nada to do with how the rest of the trans community sees the comment. It's nunya's business how Mahhh Woman and I interact with one another and how we refer to eachother.

Now, if Nixon or Mahhh Woman said it about all butches, or all transfolks, I'd have a problem with it...but she didn't.

But yeah, I totally agree with you in a generally-speaking sense.


Not That Mahhh Opinion Matters At All To You, But Jus' Sayin',
Dylan

P.S. I'd probably also feel differently if this comment had come from an activist in the community or someone of that stature...an actual 'representative' of the community...but it's just Cynthia Nixon. Like someone else mentioned, she's about as important to me as Anne Heche.

OK, I believe I get what you are saying Dylan, but the thing is there are hundred of headlines reading

"Nixon calls her Lesbian Lover (and variations thereof) A Man Without Boobs."

So if a famous partner of a trans man was in an interview and said about her/his/pronoun of choice partner "he's basically a man without a dick, and what I love about him is his transness."

So all the trans people out there would get to see this headline:
"Famous Person X calls Trans Lover a Man Without A Dick

How is that going to make transmen and transwomen feel? Are they just going to shrug it off and say oh well that's between the two.

I'm not trans but personally wouldn't want to see a headline like that over and over one bit.

[Toughy]

Originally Posted by Heart

Here's how its sexist: it implies that a woman can't be masculine, that to be masculine you can only be described as a man. It implies that women can only be feminine. That's a sexist viewpoint in that it limits the definition of woman.

Here's how its homophobic: it implies that a gay woman is really a man wanna-be, a man with boobs, rather than what she is - a lesbian, dyke, queer, butch woman. That's a homophobic viewpoint in that it denigrates queer female identities

Here's how its misogynistic: it puts the value/emphasis on male (masculine equals man/male) and devalues the femaleness inherent in the identity. That's a misogynistic viewpoint in that it devalues femaleness and privileges maleness,

Voila!

This is worth repeating. I am a little surprized at many of the responses.........but I guess I shouldn't be.......after all butch=man.

I do appreciate that on this website butch includes women as far as the founders believe.....not found (as Chris pointed out) on the other two sites. And apparently lots of folks still don't see how harmful the language of 'short man with boobs' is in defining what woman means.

Thanks Heart.........as always you speak up about how the definition of woman needs to be more inclusive.

[BullDog]

Chris, my fellow geek, you know I will always back you up! Yes, I compared the meta keywords for BFP and another butch femme site. Butch woman and femme woman are listed for BFP, not the other site. The other site does list masculine identified butches as one of their keywords, no other qualifiers for butch.

Keywords are how people find things on the internet, so yes it makes a big difference. It also makes a big difference to me to see the effort of inclusiveness being put forth by the owners, Admins and moderators of this website.

One of the several things that has really irritated me about this conversation is this casting into doubt whether Christine Marinoni is a woman or not. All it takes is a 30 second Google search to find out. I notice no one was questioning whether Cynthia Nixon was a woman or not.

Anyway this what Cynthia had to say in an interview a few years ago:

"In terms of my sexual orientation, I don't really feel that I changed," she says. "I don't feel any different than I did before. I don't feel like there was some hidden part of myself that I wasn't aware of.

"I had been with men all my life and I had never met a woman I had fallen in love with before. But when I did it didn't seem so strange.

"I don't define myself. I'm just a woman in love with another woman."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...#ixzz0njPIPyhC

They're both women. They are partners. They are raising their children. One of them has a masculine appearance and wears male clothing. She's a woman.

[Medusa]

Originally Posted by BullDog

Chris, my fellow geek, you know I will always back you up! Yes, I compared the meta keywords for BFP and another butch femme site. Butch woman and femme woman are listed for BFP, not the other site. The other site does list masculine identified butches as one of their keywords, no other qualifiers for butch.

Keywords are how people find things on the internet, so yes it makes a big difference. It also makes a big difference to me to see the effort of inclusiveness being put forth by the owners, Admins and moderators of this website.

One of the several things that has really irritated me about this conversation is this casting into doubt whether Christine Marinoni is a woman or not. All it takes is a 30 second Google search to find out. I notice no one was questioning whether Cynthia Nixon was a woman or not.

Anyway this what Cynthia had to say in an interview a few years ago:

"In terms of my sexual orientation, I don't really feel that I changed," she says. "I don't feel any different than I did before. I don't feel like there was some hidden part of myself that I wasn't aware of.

"I had been with men all my life and I had never met a woman I had fallen in love with before. But when I did it didn't seem so strange.

"I don't define myself. I'm just a woman in love with another woman."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...#ixzz0njPIPyhC

They're both women. They are partners. They are raising their children. One of them has a masculine appearance and wears male clothing. She's a woman.

Im SO glad you found these quotes Bully!

This is kinda the crux of what I was arguing earlier. Self-Identity.

These quotes refer to Cynthia Nixon identifying her partner as a woman. She has also (now in the article we are discussing) identified her partner as "basically a man with boobs".

I haven't seen anything where her *partner* self-identified. (although I will totally concede that it is highly unlikely that her partner identifies herseld as a "man with boobs")

And don't get me wrong Bully, I *do* get what you are saying and love that we are all kinda teasing this thing out together.

This conversation IS important, even if we only reiterate to one another how we want to be seen and discussed within the context of this community. I think that's valuable.

[BullDog]

No Jack, I am not talking about you, Medusa, the Moderators, Techno Geeks, or anyone else helping to make this website what it is.

I have privately and publicly thanked all of you several times. I just did so earlier today:

Originally Posted by BullDog

Chris, my fellow geek, you know I will always back you up! Yes, I compared the meta keywords for BFP and another butch femme site. Butch woman and femme woman are listed for BFP, not the other site. The other site does list masculine identified butches as one of their keywords, no other qualifiers for butch.

Keywords are how people find things on the internet, so yes it makes a big difference. It also makes a big difference to me to see the effort of inclusiveness being put forth by the owners, Admins and moderators of this website.

I don't need any special privileges, parking passes, etc etc. I have friends and allies across the gender spectrum. Certainly some of my best allies and friends in the world are trans men. I don't play the male vs. female game.

[Arwen]

Originally Posted by Heart

Bingo. Yes, I care about the language/intentions/limitations/biases and assumptions that exist around female identities. And I'm pretty amazed at some of expressions of indifference, that make this just a personal matter. Would you have the same attitude if say, Chaz Bono's partner referred to him publicly as "a man with a vagina?"

And actually, yes I would have this exact same attitude. Unless, that is, Chaz said something about it or it was said in anger by his partner.

I can't express deeply enough how much I don't care about policing other people's words like this. Not my hula hoop, Heart.

I guess that makes me a bad feminist? I don't know. I just know that I would rather have discussions with and about those that I know and care about than some Hollywood actor. Or do I have to call her an actress since she is clearly feminine?

[Random]

What about Buck Angel who calls himself

A man with a vagina...