"Stud" versus "Butch"

[The_Lady_Snow]

Originally Posted by DapperButch

As I understand the term:



The difference is that you are using the term/behaviours of a group that has more power than you do. That is why this would not be defined as appropriation.



This wouldn't be appropriation because it is the same group.

--------------

To me, this is yet another example of white privilege.

When someone who is not in the culture and uses that cultures labels, definitions, genders, traditions, etc etc it IS appropriation.

Sometimes I want to look at white folk and ask:

Really? you also want macha, stud, Pappi? Really?

Cause you don't own enough already?


Thanks Dapper for saying something.

[Sparkle]

Originally Posted by The_Lady_Snow

When someone who is not in the culture and uses that cultures labels, definitions, genders, traditions, etc etc it IS appropriation.

Sometimes I want to look at white folk and ask:

Really? you also want macha, stud, Pappi? Really?

Cause you don't own enough already?


Thanks Dapper for saying something.

I completely agree with you and

I feel like a younger generation of queers (regardless of race) adopting an ID like 'Stud' has less of an icky appropriation feeling than if they were to co-opt 'Macha', 'Pappi' or 'Aggressive' because while 'Stud' has historically been used by queer POC it feels less connected to a single group or culture. 'Aggressive', 'Macha' and 'Pappi' would feel like really icky appropriation to me, because those IDs feel very specific and very closely tied to culture, to me.

'Stud' (noun) and stud (adjective) crosses a few cultures and common uses. It's not uncommon, for example, for it to be used as a descriptor for many different male sub-groups. Just like 'Butch' is commonly used as both an identity and a descriptor in gay-male and heterosexual male communities.

But, I do come from a place of white privilege and I recognize my feelings on this could be an example of that privilege, I'm completely open to hearing if people feel differently.

[Metro]

Originally Posted by Sparkle

I completely agree with you and

I feel like a younger generation of queers (regardless of race) adopting an ID like 'Stud' has less of an icky appropriation feeling than if they were to co-opt 'Macha', 'Pappi' or 'Aggressive' because while 'Stud' has historically been used by queer POC it feels less connected to a single group or culture. 'Aggressive', 'Macha' and 'Pappi' would feel like really icky appropriation to me, because those IDs feel very specific and very closely tied to culture, to me.

'Stud' (noun) and stud (adjective) crosses a few cultures and common uses. It's not uncommon, for example, for it to be used as a descriptor for many different male sub-groups. Just like 'Butch' is commonly used as both an identity and a descriptor in gay-male and heterosexual male communities.

But, I do come from a place of white privilege and I recognize my feelings on this could be an example of that privilege, I'm completely open to hearing if people feel differently.

When newly out in the lgbtqi community I did not know or understand the cultural ties to the ID of "Stud" -- because, like Sparkle, I came from a place of white privilege. I knew it only as a descriptor of male sub-groups. Now I know differently... and also agree with Sparkle that being open to hearing other perspectives and feelings is a good thing. Diversity is one of the aspects of living in a large metropolitan area that I absolutely LOVE -- because these different perspectives enrich one and all.

[Daywalker]

I was born and raised in the Oakland Bay Area.

I feel this was geographically to my advantage as far as
exposure to a more diverse world. That does not
change the privilege factors attached to being
White but it sure as hell changed the
way I see things as a result.