Respect of Femme Sensabilities

[evolveme]

Originally Posted by evolveme

As a result, and like Snow, I've been told, that I should use more appropriate language for a "lady" more times than I can count.

Subsequently, I've witnessed how much more free men and masculine people are to use profane terms and expressions. Further, if a masculine person does not hold to certain Emily Post-like protocols, well, s/he/hy's just being a guy. But far be it for a woman to let fly a "good goddamn" on a Sunday morning, brother. My opinion is that folks really don't feel the same about it. And I think there is a perfectly patriarchal, socially-conditioned reason for it.

Which means it isn't personal. Not one bit.

Originally Posted by Corkey

Why are you calling it patriarchy? Adults cuss, my mom cussed often at my dad, he didn't return the favor. Perhaps it is your situation and not patriarchy at all.

I'm calling it patriarchy because I believe it is the conditions of the patriarchy (or more appropriately, the kyriarchy) that set in place the circumstances by which women and girls have been oppressed, suppressed and trained in such ways as to "groom" them (hi, Dylan) to be what is considered meek, good, well-mannered, palatable, and presentable - all so that they are more easily controlled.

What about this do you think is specific merely to my situation rather than being patriarchal?

That's kind of rhetorical, by the way.

[The_Lady_Snow]

My momma and daddy raised me to speak my mind, whichever way I choose to.



*spit*

[blush]

I reallyreally don't need anyone to protect me from words.

One of the reasons I continue to participate in these forums is I appreciate the rawness of them. How boring the world would be if we all talked and wrote like newscasters.

As far as manners and decorum go, we all know people who have "perfect" manners and slit throats. I appreciate good manners, but I appreciate proven integrity more.

I've also noticed we've(the community "we") have gotten into the habit of referencing apocryphal posts that have existed in threads and may be taken out of context and used to prove points. For me, it's confusing because I don't know the context or intent of the mystery post. Has anyone else felt this way, or does this cheese stand alone? (rlin, I'm not calling you out. It's a trend I'm seeing.)

[Corkey]

Put it this way, I was never "groomed" to be anything other that who I am, not the baby stuff, the dress stuff, not the marriage to a man stuff. That is why I call it situational, and not patriarchy.

[evolveme]

Originally Posted by Corkey

Put it this way, I was never "groomed" to be anything other that who I am, not the baby stuff, the dress stuff, not the marriage to a man stuff. That is why I call it situational, and not patriarchy.

Your first sentence is confusing. It could mean that you were groomed to be who you are, in which case, you're not leaving much room for the element of personal identity and how it might arise independent of the nurture conundrum. I, too, am a lot of things despite my "grooming." Or it could mean that despite the way you were groomed - to include your infancy/childhood, having to wear dresses, and whether or not you were married/encouraged to marry - you are who you are. Again, it isn't clear. Still, none of this - not one bit - changes the reality that women and female bodied people, and cismen and boys as well - live in a kyriarchical society and are oppressed by the conditions of that society. It effects the way we are raised, and places expectations of behavior onto us out of its power-over paradigm.

So however you, Corkey, became who you are is really irrelevant to whether the patriarchy exists and fully impacts the reality of women and girls every-motherfucking-where. It just does. To say "It's just situational," is a flat out denial of its existence, and that is seriously dangerous thinking.

[Corkey]

Sorry going to disagree with you, I am allowed to do so. If I've confused you, well here is clarification. I was not raised to be a woman, I was raised to be a human being.

[Bob]

[Corkey]

OK Bob that was dramatic, and not really to the point of my remarks. Drive by perhaps.

[Bob]

Originally Posted by Corkey

OK Bob that was dramatic, and not really to the point of my remarks. Drive by perhaps.

How exactly can you be 'respectful of femme sensibilities' when it's clear you orbit around no sun but your own?

[Corkey]

Originally Posted by Bob

How exactly can you be 'respectful of femme sensibilities' when it's clear you orbit around no sun but your own?

I don't orbit around yours you mean. I am an individual and not a sheep, so just because I happen to disagree with you and e I'm the bad guy. How positively profound of you Bob.

[Bob]

Meanwhile, back to the topic at hand...

[Corkey]

By all means....

[Bob]

Actually, I don't get the point of this thread. Nowhere are these so-called 'femme sensabilities[sic]' defined.

In fact, I don't think there are such a thing as 'femme sensibilities'. At least, not in the context of what appears to be a conversation about basic manners and common civility. One's gender identification doesn't grant one special privileges or immunities.

[Mister Bent]

Originally Posted by Bob

Actually, I don't get the point of this thread. Nowhere are these so-called 'femme sensabilities[sic]' defined.

In fact, I don't think there are such a thing as 'femme sensibilities'. At least, not in the context of what appears to be a conversation about basic manners and common civility. One's gender identification doesn't grant one special privileges or immunities.

Another place to discuss, ad nauseam, the patriarchy?

(Because we don't have enough and no one, apparently, "gets it.")

But then, I only speculate.

And await the backlash.

[apretty]

talk amongst yourselves anyway you'd like--i don't *prefer* to read ball-talk unless it's *obviously* ironic and that's not because how i do *femme*, that's because 'ball-talk' isn't clever (and that, my friends, is a fate far worse than death).

*to be fair, i have a low tolerance for tedium and anything i deem less than clever.

[apretty]

Originally Posted by Bob

One's gender identification doesn't grant one special privileges or immunities.

except, except! when the lady-time got me out of PE in high school (don't take that away from me!!!)

*and i may still try to pull the lady-card when it comes to tidying, feeding the dogs, dishes... (or anything else i would REALLY prefer E to do).

[The_Lady_Snow]

Balls...

I just had to say it again, cause who knew WHO KNEW that would incite all this... Who knew that someone enforcing boundaries would ensue all this..



I now see why Worm prefers castles made of blankets and pillows.

[Lynn]

I guess I am stuck at the notion of "femme sensibility" being a lady thing that must be protected by someone more masculine than I. It just feels sexist to me. While I may be feminine and appear to be a lady (to the world, maybe to you), these are attributes of mine. They are qualities that reflect something about me. They aren't ME. I'm a small, soft-spoken woman who says "fuck" a lot. And other things which might affect your sensibilities, whatever they may be.

If I don't like how I'm spoken to, I am likely to say something. I hope you would do the same. But, I don't ask people to change to suit me. I may prefer to be in an environment where people mainly treat each other as they would like to be treated, but I don't need or want anyone watching out for my delicate linguistic constitution. In fact, the idea of it is more off-putting to me than using any particular word in any particular context. What is validating and empowering is when I am given the space to respond the way I honestly feel, and where you (the general you) show respect for what I say.

[Gayla]

I tend to adjust my behavior, language, etc. based on what I'm doing and who I'm doing it with. I guess I've never thought of this as some weird thing, rather as just basic social skills and respect.

Sometimes I say bad words, use more slang and end sentences with prepositions and other times I don't. And yes, it's totally based on the people involved. Not because I think someone may not be able to "handle" it or that I, in some icky, fucked up way, must "protect" them but just because sometimes it's not appropriate. I'm not going to speak the same way to a client that I would to someone here. I also don't speak to everyone here the same because I don't have the same level of familiarity. I may say something to oblivia that I would never say to Nat or something to Corkey that I'd never say to Hack. I think it's all about social skills, respect levels and appropriateness.

I don't think that I adjust my language much differently around femmes although there probably is a little bit of subconscious old schoolness going on that I'm not fully aware of. I think that's probably more of a respect thing then a protection thing, but I'll have to think about that.

I also don't think I've ever felt the urge to go rushing into a thread out of a need to defend a femme. I don't know any that can't defend themselves.

[Kosmo]

Originally Posted by evolveme

Unrelated to the topic, except kinda not:

Are people generally more offended when they hear/read femmes/feminine people cussin' and a'swearin' than when they hear/read masculine people doing it? How about in the referencing of sex/use of vulgarity, generally?

I just wonder what y'all think.

I am not offended when I read it here, but I have to say that if, my sister, for instance started dropping some crude (in my definition) vocabulary, I would be taken back by it.

My parents cussed and swore alot. Mostly when they argued which was basically very often. The language could be quite crude at best. So I think for me, it triggers bad stuff. My partner has cussed/sworn and I am taken by surprise because it's somewhat rare, but, unless it falls in my crude category, I'm ok with it.

I just never gravitated to using them in conversation on a daily basis.