In Celebration of Butch Femininity

[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.

[C0LLETTE]

Please allow me to make something very clear. I don't care who thanks me or doesn't thank me. Who sends me messages or doesn't. I have no horse in this race and don't want one.

[musicman]

I just wanted to send out a kudos to the site Admin for NOT shutting this thread down. Do I understand the guts of it .... no, but I can appreciate the healthy debate , the going back and forth the thread is creating. I've seen a few times on this site a thread shut down because someone went against the grain of the majority or stepped on someones toes.

We need more of these thread, the meat and potatoes, stick to your ribs threads

[stargazingboi]

Originally Posted by tapu

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.

then we would all have our own subcategory...wouldn't we, and we would all fall under the umbrella term of lesbian. Then, right there in itself should prevent division and not continue the break down of a community.

[tapu]

Originally Posted by stargazingboi

then we would all have our own subcategory...wouldn't we, and we would all fall under the umbrella term of lesbian. Then, right there in itself should prevent division and not continue the break down of a community.

I think I understand... what is your definition of lesbian then? I mean, what are the basic semantic features that describe the category "Lesbian," so that you can have your umbrella?

[BullDog]

Originally Posted by tapu

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.

MTFs and FTMs are human beings (not caveats or special categories) and they are lesbians if that is how they choose to identify. That's why I dislike your definition of lesbian based on anatomy. That's why MTFs aren't welcome at MichFest. Nobody qualifies or is disqualified based on what they have or don't have downstairs.

[The_Lady_Snow]

So now we're gonna "other" Trans folk? Really? Are we really going to be ugly? WTF? I don't understand why the continued erasure, they're LESBIANS cause that's their IDENTITY! Is it that difficult to grasp?

[Nat]

Oh how exciting to look in on the thread I started and see 7 pages already! Woohoo

Okay so now I've read through it and maybe most of it is off-topic, but I do love you contentious people. <3

I also feel much like dykeumentary posted - we are not the actual problem even when we fight tooth and nail with each other over stuff.

I don't think every butch has an especially pronounced feminine side, just like I don't think every femme has a pronounced masculine side. However, I am a femme who enjoys my masculine side and hates to feel shamed or squashed or excluded for not fitting some imaginary femme mold.

I also love me some butch pride where it applies. I'd hate to see butches excluded from butchness by people in our community with narrow views of what butch is.

A long time ago on a site far away, a self-identified butch told me that she wore women's underwear because it fit her and from time to time she enjoyed wearing lipstick. This was a really neat butch - cute, smart, thoughtful, etc. and she was a butch - no mistaking that. But she also said she would NEVER admit to these facts about herself online, as she would no longer be considered butch should she do so. I puzzled over that for a bit - back then I was still a baby femme and didn't really understand much about how gender pressure happened. But over the years, I've seen some really awesome self-identified butches hide their girlier qualities for fear of ridicule and I've seen some butchy people avoid b/f space and identity due to what are perceived as rigid definitions - while at the same time feeling isolated by non-b-f lesbians who often really don't know quite what to do with a butch or a femme - the loudest of these often being the most unwelcoming voices. And so with slices from both sides, these folks remain in the desert - deprived of the comradery, the shared knowledge, and even the bickering that we get to indulge in. I personally think that's a pity.

[Martina]

Identity categories need to be porous. Otherwise they are another excuse to police and oppress. Rigidly defining identity categories is a classic, classic form of oppression among members of a group. It's not the point. How useful IS it to have a definition that is completely consistent? Not at all. Not unless you are interested in excluding people or in treating some members differently.

[C0LLETTE]

Originally Posted by Martina

Identity categories need to be porous. Otherwise they are another excuse to police and oppress. Rigidly defining identity categories is a classic, classic form of oppression among members of a group. It's not the point. How useful IS it to have a definition that is completely consistent? Not at all. Not unless you are interested in excluding people or in treating some members differently.

On the other hand, how useful is it to have a definition that is so fluid and porous that no one knows from minute to minute what is meant by a term? It's quite the conundrum when we talk about "members" of something but no one can agree on what that something is. Maybe "exclusion" isn't necessarily the automatic perjorative we assume it to be. We aren't all Polish either. Though I suppose we all can become Polish once we know the criterion.

[Play]

Words have an original meaning and then may have evolved into a broader
or narrower meaning. We, as humans, recognize that things have changed
over the course of time. I think as caring, thinking, compassionate people,
it would serve all of us well to embrace the ever-changing meaning of words in
our own community.

While I appreciate everyone's input into any conversation, I have to say
the intent of some seems more combative than constructive.

To quote my dad, "Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one"

That being said....I'm enjoying this discussion even though it has gone
wildly off-course.

If someone feels the need to judge me.....
I hope it is for my intent instead of poor word choice.

[lamuymuyfem]

Originally Posted by BullDog

MTFs and FTMs are human beings (not caveats or special categories) and they are lesbians if that is how they choose to identify. That's why I dislike your definition of lesbian based on anatomy. That's why MTFs aren't welcome at MichFest. Nobody qualifies or is disqualified based on what they have or don't have downstairs.

Wait wait wait wait….in my understanding, gender ID and sexual orientation are two separate things……which means that transgender folks should have the right to a sexual orientation, which could possibly be lesbian…….si o no?

[BullDog]

Originally Posted by lamuymuyfem

Wait wait wait wait….in my understanding, gender ID and sexual orientation are two separate things……which means that transgender folks should have the right to a sexual orientation, which could possibly be lesbian…….si o no?

Yes that is what I was saying. Anyone who says they are a lesbian, is a lesbian. People have different reasons for iding that way.

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by BullDog

Yes that is what I was saying. Anyone who says they are a lesbian, is a lesbian. People have different reasons for iding that way.

Between this and your other post....you are saying:

cis women are lesbians if they so choose
MTF are lesbians if they so choose
FTM are lesbian if they so choose
ergo, cis heterosexual men are also lesbian if they so choose
my cat is lesbian if she so chooses.

I can call myself a ham sandwich, doesnt mean I am one.

And Snow thinks we are othering transfolks?

You have effectively rendered being a lesbian to meaning nothing. Its not bad enough that lesbians have been bashed in this thread, called responsible for all that ails the community, now you are trying to totally transform women who love other women into something else?

This has got to be the most disrespectful, insulting, negating, misogynistic, lesbian phobic, homophobic bunch of bullshit I have ever heard in this community.