Reclaiming Lesbian Pride

[ScandalAndy]

Originally Posted by honeybarbara

well I see your point but I have to be honest and say that under that definition, cisgendered really means next to nothing to me. it's so other-subjective that I've lost any inclination to bother trying to figure it out. It sounds very othering - as I'm sure the precurser "trans" feels to many women. Perhaps that's the point, to wear a shoe that doesn't really fit to gain perspective. But I'd have no idea how to have a conversation with someone applying cisgendered to me if they had no idea who I was or how I felt about my own gender and all they saw was feminine gender presentation and a female body. they wouldn't know my self concept, nor my gender "role" with my parter, nor how I fuck, nor how I work, nor what pronouns I prefer.

But I'm pretty sure that's how many women feel about the qualifyier "trans" as well. Heart is right, the dichotamy is false and misleading. And frankly I'd have a hard time thinking of when I'd actually use either one in my daily life unless someone told me they self-identified that way. When the fuck do I ever refer to my women friends as trans or cis? never. that's like saying "my butch friend" which to me sounds a bit odd. It's my friend Bill, or Hilary or Seven. I dunno maybe it's only purpose is defining boundaries of inclusion. Like if someone was putting up a dating add. And frankly my local community is lucky enough not to have to use those. Perhaps it's a position of privilege not to have to find further qualifiers.

and yeah, heart, body dysphoria is a pretty awful thing in women - I've had it for YEARS, most of my life. It is different in target than my partner but the pain is quite similar. Learning to live with it has certainly been a challange but being able to claim things without shame has helped, and as I discover more things about myself, the more controllable it gets. It do think it's ultimately about control over one's own body, in the end, in all cases.

And I am interested in that book. Which I oddly never read.

I can see why that definition would not hold very much meaning for you. I think my point is getting lost here, and that is something I am trying very hard to avoid.

I do not think that anyone other than the individual should be identifying anyone other than themselves.

I believe that there are different struggles faced by different individuals that are radically influenced by sex and behavior and physical appearance. I think these experiences need to be shared and we are constantly inventing and adapting language as an imperfect vehicle to help us share these stories and create dialogue, address social injustice, and enact change.

I think you bring up a good point with "boundaries of inclusion". I did not think that my personal boundaries of inclusion could be construed as exclusionary, but upon further examination i see that, under certain interpretations, they could be.


I am glad that you and Heart are bringing up these points, they are important for me to examine. I may not always agree with you both, but I appreciate your willingness to explain where you are coming from and the importance of your point of view as well as mine.

I do not want to put forth the impression that I am not fully aware of the inequality of women in the world. Being a woman still sucks. There are still rules in place to keep women from positions of power, that encourage violence against them, and, ultimately, keep women in subservience and pain. This is terrible behavior and it is wrong. I just don't want to exclude anyone who could be a valuable community member or ally because the way they describe their experience doesn't fit into what we think is okay.