Here come the lesbians, here come the leaping lesbians...

[citybutch]

I can reassure you that no one is getting reimbursed for any expenses outside of Board work. The percentages are available to you on the P&L. But I am happy to go into further detail if needed. Any Board I have ever been on has reimbursed (fed, provided for room and board, etc for Board retreats and efforts.) There has been no additional support to Board members on the BV Board.

And, June, I know you hold no issue with me personally. I hope you know I review all receipts and hold them on file.... I am now nurturing a new set of eyes so it is more than my review and the Boards. Please know that this is a new organization... policies and procedures take time to develop, etc. The initial national conference was only 9 months after the concept was developed. The organization has come a long way... and has a lot to do still. And everyone I know involved is working hard to create an organization that has impact for the butch/stud/aggressive community.

Originally Posted by June

CityButch -- Thank you for your time. As stated above, I wasn't specifically asking about Board Retreats. Additionally, and I believe I talked about this on Sasha's blog, if you are getting reimbursed in ways that others are not, then in effect, you are getting compensation. If your phone bill is paid, if your parking is paid when other participants have to pay out of pocket. If your hotel, food and bar tabs are paid, these are expenses you don't have that everyone else does.

Y'all can do what you want, of course. Make money! Pay/compensate people! But I think that it best serves a community based organization to say out loud, in print how much of their $125-$175 registration is going towards the personal expenses of a few people. I think that way because of the Dash site and the Femme Con, by the way. But I think you know that already, and I hold no rancor for you, I hope you know that. There are reasons why I am fired up about this issue, and it's not like it's a surprise to the Founder of BV, we had this conversation about transparency many, many times.

[dykeumentary]

[quote=Chazz;388547]The problem, as I see it, is that the high echelon of "Butch Voices" has a different world view and agenda than woman identified butches. How could they not? It's okay; they're entitled.

Furthermore, the "Butch Voices" folks are speaking a different language. They're speak

[JustJo]

Originally Posted by christie0918

I have been following the conversation regarding BV, female vs. male (feminine vs. masculine) leadership, the feelings of erasure and invalidation of female ID'd butches and non qualified butches (for those who just claim "butch") and I just have to say that it feels really, really negating to have the frivilious comments interjected as the ones I have quoted here.

Its obvious that this is a conversation that isn't easy or not close to folks' hearts. Why is this shit necessary?

It seems very immature and demeaning to me. If I can't add to the conversation at hand, I generally just read. Doesn't mean I am not interested if I don't participate nor does it mean that its not important. Perhaps I am too busy to be able to take the time to engage and stay engaged. Perhaps I need time to reflect on others' posts and get my own in order.

What really silences me is when I am moving right along, reading the conversation and then WHAM! It really distracts and deflects. Is that the purpose?

Would it happen in other forums such as the Femme, Butch or Trans zones? I can't help but believe it would cause quite the ruckus and while I can't recall a specific instance, I feel almost certain it has happened in those zones.

Why can't we have the important conversations without the attempts at levity? Is it too uncomfortable?

My apologies for the rant. I watched it happen a couple of days ago and didn't say anything for lack of time, but today, it just really crawled all over me. Perhaps others don't share my view and that's really ok.

I really hope the conversations can continue. They are important.

Christie

Christie, I certainly didn't intend to offend anyone with my comments.

However....this current conversation about Butch Voices and the political, gender, community organizing, "speaking for others" and all of the other serious topics being discussed is happening in a thread entitled "Here come the lesbians, here come the leaping lesbians..." and now the conversation (as I understand it) is all about the inclusion of transpeople in a historically butch venue.

I would argue that the current conversation is the derail....and I'd like to get back to folks on the site stepping up and saying "hi, I'm a lesbian."

My description of myself is actually on point....and my light-hearted approach at the serious topic of saying....I am sick to fucking death of everyone trying to define how everyone else "should" be and what we should call ourselves and if we're femme enough or butch enough or what those terms even mean.

i define me.

You define you.

I say let anyone who claims the title butch define it for themselves.

And, just for me and I know I'm more than a little toey right now....I'm going back to my light-hearted lesbian leaping, in a thread with the title of the same name.

Thanks,
Jo, the leaping, cannon-balling, tough as nails and polka dot wearing lesbian

[*Anya*]

I, for one, am glad there is a thread where I can once again be reminded that I am a Lesbian, feminist, femme.

[Kobi]

Interesting how this thread didnt get too much traffic until the post about how butch lesbians are affected by and feel about what is happening at BV.

A 100% increase in pages in just a couple of days! Thats impressive.

I know why the butches are leaping but I'm not too sure why everyone else suddenly wants to leap. It's nice to see tho.

[dykeumentary]

Originally Posted by Chazz

The problem, as I see it, is that the high echelon of "Butch Voices" has a different world view and agenda than woman identified butches. How could they not? It's okay; they're entitled.

Furthermore, the "Butch Voices" folks are speaking a different language. They're speak GENDERese - a language borne of gender theory.

Woman identified butches tend to speak in SEXUAL ORIENTATION-ese - a language based in sex/biology, lesbian/gay rights, and, in some cases, Feminism. That's okay, too.

What is NOT okay is the high echelon of "Butch Voices" (transgenderists) presuming to speak for BUTCHES. Not all butches - butches, period.

Butch is a term that speaks to sexual orientation, sex/ biology (femaleness) - not transgenderism. It's a full time, life long identity - not a way station on the road to maledom.

"BUTCH" has a long, hard fought, and precious HERitage that has nothing to do with transgenderism, except to the extent that the lesbian community has ceded use of the term to those who see it as a transitional, oft times, a convenient identifier on the way to maleness.

Butch is not that. It's a life-long identity that has to do with sexual orientation.

"For the life of me" seems to be the phrase in fashion, so I'll just say: For the life of me, how did a term based in sexual orientation get appropriated by folks who don't see themselves as lesbian?

Well, it's part and parcel to the imposed tagging around "cis" this and "cis" that. Now, the same folks who brought us "cis" are presuming to take ownership of (lesbian) butch identity and define that, too.

It's okay to call to call a foul, a foul. It's okay defend what rightfully belongs to you. That's not oppressive or being exclusionary. It's being self-respecting.

Vive Butch Nation.

Thats strange. I posted, but now the post is messed up and a 'thanks' is even gone. I'll see if i can remember it:

Is there some cultural/regional/ethnic aversion to the word "lesbian" among "the deciders" of BV? Anyone have any insight on this? I rarely see terms like "aggressive lesbian" and "stud lesbian" so i am curious. Is there a cultural reason that the word lesbian is being avoided? The "masculine of center" terminology seems like a way to take the sex out of it. Who wants that?

There's the idea that goes "means are the ends, and the journey shapes the destination". I think BV won't end up where it (or it's public relations firm) thinks they are going if their processs continues like they've handled this. Working against oppression requires naming and challenging oppression. BV is acting like its found a "market" in appropriating the word butch (women who continue to be oppressed), giving the word a new definition (one that they feel comfortable with), then having their "work" be paid for by the oppressed people. That is decidedly not liberation, but it might be "intellectual property".

I love the word "lesbian" and all the danger it implies. I'm so glad BV has given us lesbians the opportunity to be seen as dangerous once again. People should go if they want, but I'd rather be fighting oppression than "branding" it. And I'd rather be having hot lesbian sex.

[Heart]

I am mystified about why BV would jettison the word "butch" because it's been hurled at people in a derogatory or humiliating manner. Haven't most words related to queerdom been used that way? Like dyke, faggot, lezzie, the word queer itself?

But I guess screaming, "Fucking masculine-of-center!" doesn't quite work -- so maybe they have a point...?

[*Anya*]

I thought given both threads, a little herstory might give perspective. For those of us that already lived through this in the second wave of feminism-it really just is the same issue of inclusion:

"In 1969, National Organization for Women president Betty Friedan had referred to growing lesbian visibility as a "lavender menace" and fired openly lesbian newsletter editor Rita Mae Brown. Furthermore, in 1970 Betty Friedan engineered the expulsion of lesbians, including local president Ivy Bottini, from NOW's New York chapter. In 1970, at the Congress to Unite Women, on the first evening when all four hundred feminists were assembeled in the auditorium, the lights were shut off, and when they were turned on again twenty women wearing t-shirts that read "Lavender Menace" stood at the front of the room, facing the audience. One of the women then read their group's paper "The Woman-Identified Woman", which was the first major lesbian feminist statement. The group, who later named themselves "Radicalesbians", were among the first to challenge the heterosexism of heterosexual feminists and to describe lesbian experience in positive terms."

[Jess]

Originally Posted by Anya/Georgia

I thought given both threads, a little herstory might give perspective. For those of us that already lived through this in the second wave of feminism-it really just is the same issue of inclusion:

"In 1969, National Organization for Women president Betty Friedan had referred to growing lesbian visibility as a "lavender menace" and fired openly lesbian newsletter editor Rita Mae Brown. Furthermore, in 1970 Betty Friedan engineered the expulsion of lesbians, including local president Ivy Bottini, from NOW's New York chapter. In 1970, at the Congress to Unite Women, on the first evening when all four hundred feminists were assembeled in the auditorium, the lights were shut off, and when they were turned on again twenty women wearing t-shirts that read "Lavender Menace" stood at the front of the room, facing the audience. One of the women then read their group's paper "The Woman-Identified Woman", which was the first major lesbian feminist statement. The group, who later named themselves "Radicalesbians", were among the first to challenge the heterosexism of heterosexual feminists and to describe lesbian experience in positive terms."

Thank you. Reminders of why lesbians felt removed from the national feminist/ equal rights struggle are always a good thing. As I have thought about this thread the film If These Walls Could Talk Part 2 has come to mind a few times. Here is a description from Wiki regarding a section of that film that directly relates to this:

"1972
Linda (Michelle Williams), a young student, now shares the house with three friends, all lesbians. They face conflict with the feminist group they are part of when the other women do not want to include lesbian issues despite the fact that Linda and her friends helped to found the group and fought for free contraception on campus with their straight friends.
At a lesbian bar they have not been to before, they are surprised and disappointed to see women apparently fulfilling traditional butch and femme roles. They laugh at Amy (Chloë Sevigny), a young butch woman who is wearing a tie. Amy asks Linda to dance but she refuses while her friends are still there. The others soon leave and Linda stays behind and dances with Amy. Later, Amy gives Linda a ride home on her motorcycle and they kiss. Linda invites Amy to return the next day.
The next day Linda and the others are arguing with a woman from the feminist group when Amy arrives. Linda is embarrassed and is short with Amy who quickly leaves. Linda's friends tease her about Amy and question how they can be taken seriously as feminists if they associate with people like Amy. They cannot understand why a woman would dress like a man when they have fought so hard to escape such stereotypical roles.
Linda goes to Amy's house and apologizes. They sleep together. The next morning Linda sees a picture of Amy as a child, dressed like a boy. She asks Amy if Amy is supposed to be the man and Linda the woman. Amy says no and accuses Linda of being afraid that people will know what she is if she is seen with Amy.
Amy goes to Linda's house for dinner. Linda urges her friends to give Amy a chance but an awkward evening deteriorates when Linda's friends laugh at Amy and try to make her change her clothes. Amy leaves, upset. Linda follows her home and tells her that she was never ashamed of Amy, but only of herself. They reconcile."

If you have never seen the film, I highly recommend it. It has three parts, the above section is the second segment and one of the best filmed ( even if it is fictional) scenarios based on this divisive era.

Regarding what is and what is not "appropriate" content for this particular thread, I feel that it is pretty open to interpretation. The title and opening ( thank you Liam for creating it!) leaves ample room for ANY discussion Lesbians may want to engage in among one another. To conclude it is for just a role call ( hi, my name is ______ and I am a lesbian) is ok, if that is as far as you ( the reader) wish to take it. I have found that generally, after the howdys have taken place, other conversations will follow. I am pretty ok with seeing where the conversations go. It is how we grow.

[tapu]

Fantastic film. I can still see Chloe Sevigney's face when they try to dress her up femme.

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by Anya/Georgia

I thought given both threads, a little herstory might give perspective. For those of us that already lived through this in the second wave of feminism-it really just is the same issue of inclusion:

"In 1969, National Organization for Women president Betty Friedan had referred to growing lesbian visibility as a "lavender menace" and fired openly lesbian newsletter editor Rita Mae Brown. Furthermore, in 1970 Betty Friedan engineered the expulsion of lesbians, including local president Ivy Bottini, from NOW's New York chapter. In 1970, at the Congress to Unite Women, on the first evening when all four hundred feminists were assembeled in the auditorium, the lights were shut off, and when they were turned on again twenty women wearing t-shirts that read "Lavender Menace" stood at the front of the room, facing the audience. One of the women then read their group's paper "The Woman-Identified Woman", which was the first major lesbian feminist statement. The group, who later named themselves "Radicalesbians", were among the first to challenge the heterosexism of heterosexual feminists and to describe lesbian experience in positive terms."

I remember it all very well! And now, I am a "woman identified feminist butch!"

Something I must bring up is that it was those very 1970's feminist activist lesbians, that brought gender and transgender theory out of the closet! Put it in the public eye. It always amazes me how historical facts get re-written. Every transgendered person can thank a Second Wave feminist for the entire emergence of gender identification variables, political view formation, services to and for, entry of laws protecting transpeople, etc. to the very lesbian feminists that so many, refer to with nothing but ignorance about historical facts.

Of course, feminism and gender theory must progress, stretch, and become relevant to each generation- but misrepresenting or vilifying its roots isn't growth- it is simply bigotry of another kind.

Ignorance remains bliss..........

[dark_crystal]

Originally Posted by Anya/Georgia

I thought given both threads, a little herstory might give perspective. For those of us that already lived through this in the second wave of feminism-it really just is the same issue of inclusion:

"In 1969, National Organization for Women president Betty Friedan had referred to growing lesbian visibility as a "lavender menace" and fired openly lesbian newsletter editor Rita Mae Brown. Furthermore, in 1970 Betty Friedan engineered the expulsion of lesbians, including local president Ivy Bottini, from NOW's New York chapter. In 1970, at the Congress to Unite Women, on the first evening when all four hundred feminists were assembeled in the auditorium, the lights were shut off, and when they were turned on again twenty women wearing t-shirts that read "Lavender Menace" stood at the front of the room, facing the audience. One of the women then read their group's paper "The Woman-Identified Woman", which was the first major lesbian feminist statement. The group, who later named themselves "Radicalesbians", were among the first to challenge the heterosexism of heterosexual feminists and to describe lesbian experience in positive terms."

i love what the Radicalesbians did for us, but i admit to being disturbed when reading about political lesbianism (not to say the two are related!!!!), which taught that women should choose to be lesbian as a political statement. I kinda wish that hadn't happened

i feel like that pholosophy inadvertently got in the way of getting the message out that for many (most? all?) of us it is not a choice

and i feel like this kind of philosophy was also at work throughout the years i spent denying my attraction to butches, as it seemed expected that since i was choosing to be with a woman, i should choose one who fit the model of feminist political correctness ascendant in late 80s Texas.

[tapu]

Whenever a man has said to me--and this has happened more than once--"You just want to be a man," I say, "Well, that makes two of us."

[JustJo]

Originally Posted by Jess

Regarding what is and what is not "appropriate" content for this particular thread, I feel that it is pretty open to interpretation. The title and opening ( thank you Liam for creating it!) leaves ample room for ANY discussion Lesbians may want to engage in among one another. To conclude it is for just a role call ( hi, my name is ______ and I am a lesbian) is ok, if that is as far as you ( the reader) wish to take it. I have found that generally, after the howdys have taken place, other conversations will follow. I am pretty ok with seeing where the conversations go. It is how we grow.

I agree...which is why I objected to being told that my posts (and Tapu's) were somehow "not okay" and the others were.

I'm fine with any and all posting. I don't come in and smack people for derailing...I simply post what I want to, and allow others to do the same.

It's a simple approach, and lends itself to acceptance rather than policing others....and I'm all for that.

If folks here want to discuss serious subjects...have at it. I simply objected to Christie's attempts to police the thread (and me).

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by JustJo

I agree...which is why I objected to being told that my posts (and Tapu's) were somehow "not okay" and the others were.

I'm fine with any and all posting. I don't come in and smack people for derailing...I simply post what I want to, and allow others to do the same.

It's a simple approach, and lends itself to acceptance rather than policing others....and I'm all for that.

If folks here want to discuss serious subjects...have at it. I simply objected to Christie's attempts to police the thread (and me).

For what it is worth, to me, it seems there are common courtesy and respect issues that would be nice to address here.

The lesbian zone and its threads are not very widely used. A serious topic of interest and relevence to a butch lesbians was being explored. It had morphed into some herstory and reminder of where we all came from too.

In the midst of this, folks who rarely have the need to leap, suddenly needed to leap. I am a lesbian, so I am all for leaping.

However, if there was a serious conversation going on someplace about cancer treatment, it would not even occur to me to pop in and start a posting about the Red Sox.

And, I certainly would have a hard time getting bent out of shape if I wasnt responded to or if I got my hat handed to me on a sliver platter for having interrupted.

There is freedom here to go where we please and post where we want, when we want. But, to me, it doesnt over rule common courtesy and respect for others.

Just my take on things. Please, continue leaping.

[tapu]

Originally Posted by Kobi

For what it is worth, to me, it seems there are common courtesy and respect issues that would be nice to address here.

The lesbian zone and its threads are not very widely used. A serious topic of interest and relevence to a butch lesbians was being explored. It had morphed into some herstory and reminder of where we all came from too.

In the midst of this, folks who rarely have the need to leap, suddenly needed to leap. I am a lesbian, so I am all for leaping.

However, if there was a serious conversation going on someplace about cancer treatment, it would not even occur to me to pop in and start a posting about the Red Sox.

And, I certainly would have a hard time getting bent out of shape if I wasnt responded to or if I got my hat handed to me on a sliver platter for having interrupted.

There is freedom here to go where we please and post where we want, when we want. But, to me, it doesnt over rule common courtesy and respect for others.

Just my take on things. Please, continue leaping.

Calling that common courtesy doesn't make it a neutral viewpoint. Real courtesy is mutual. Some of us in there leaping weren't disrespectful of those turning it into a platform for "butch voices" debate--no one said, "hey, wrong thread," now did they?--but at the same time when someone said anything else, it was squelched. To say that was the equivalent of interrupting a conversation about cancer to post about the Red Sox is at best hyperbole.

[tapu]

Originally Posted by Kobi

A serious topic of interest and relevence to a butch lesbians was being explored. It had morphed into some herstory and reminder of where we all came from too.

For the record, it had morphed into a discussion of who was getting paid or comped at this BV conference.

[JustJo]

Originally Posted by Kobi

For what it is worth, to me, it seems there are common courtesy and respect issues that would be nice to address here.

The lesbian zone and its threads are not very widely used. A serious topic of interest and relevence to a butch lesbians was being explored. It had morphed into some herstory and reminder of where we all came from too.

In the midst of this, folks who rarely have the need to leap, suddenly needed to leap. I am a lesbian, so I am all for leaping.

However, if there was a serious conversation going on someplace about cancer treatment, it would not even occur to me to pop in and start a posting about the Red Sox.

And, I certainly would have a hard time getting bent out of shape if I wasnt responded to or if I got my hat handed to me on a sliver platter for having interrupted.

There is freedom here to go where we please and post where we want, when we want. But, to me, it doesnt over rule common courtesy and respect for others.

Just my take on things. Please, continue leaping.

Hi Kobi,

I understand your point of view and appreciate your post. I am also a fan of common courtesy....which is why you'll rarely hear me telling anyone else what they should do, say, be, or how they should conduct themselves.

Here's the thing for me....and, yes, it ties in to feminism and our history if you'll bear with me.

As a woman, I have been told all of my life how I should behave, what I should value, how I should think, how I should look, etc. Who I was, was not acceptable to the larger society. I should conform, and accept the values of others and....for lack of a better summary....be a good girl.

When I come into BFP, which is supposed to be OUR space, where we can be ourselves, and get policed by other members.....I have an issue.

If I want to be silly or frivilous or serious or intellectual or pissed off is up to me. It is not up to anyone else.

There is another thread (or two) devoted to the subject of the Butch Voices conference. I am not in there leaping and joking. I have stayed out, out of simple respect, for a few reasons.

1. I'm not butch
2. I've never attended Butch Voices
3. I don't know any of the people involved
4. I don't know any of the history involved

I may go read, but I probably won't comment. And I certainly won't go be silly in that thread.

However, this thread started with a light-hearted tone. Yes, some serious conversations evolved, and I'm all for that. But I resent, like hell, being smacked for being light-hearted in a thread that was intended to be.

I also resent, like hell, being told how to behave by anyone.

If I have violated the TOS, and a moderator points it out to me, then I will acknowledge, apologize and do my damndest not to do it again. I also follow the laws of the larger society. I don't steal. I don't hit people. I don't even lie on my tax return. Heck, I don't even roll through stop signs. I'm a "rulester", as an old-co-worker named me.

I was raised by a mother that we called, among other things "the rabid feminist." I was not allowed to own a Barbie doll because they were tools of the oppressors. I was not allowed to take Home Economics (even though I loved the subject) or Typing in school because they were the means used to subjugate women. Get the feel for it?

Once again, who I was was not acceptable.

I have never been acceptable...not to the male-dominated conservative society that thought I should get married, have babies and blah blah blah (I'm almost 50....so those messages were alive and well).

I was not acceptable to the andro-lesbians of the 70s because of my inherent femininity.

Here's my personal feminism....and it took me a long damn time to come to....I am just fine. I am acceptable to me. Whether I have sex and relationships with men, or women, or no one at all....that's up to me. If I am intellectual and serious or goofy and frivilous....that's up to me. If I am aggressive, passive, assertive or indifferent....that's up to me.

I do not always (okay, almost never) spout the politically correct vernacular. I'm not a politically correct person. And that's up to me, too.

I am tired of people telling other people how to be....whether we do it in Butch Voices or other conferences, online, in our laws, or by declaring war on other countries.

Maybe I'm getting old and fed up (in fact, I'm sure I am)....but I am sick and tired of it. We do it all the time. We constantly message others.....don't think like that, don't talk like that, don't dress like that, don't use those words, use these words, be this way, call yourself this, don't vote like that, vote like this, believe what I believe, don't think for yourself........BLECH!

When we start behaving with each other the way the larger society has behaved towards us....by judging, censoring and shutting people down....then I'm going to do a big ass, polka-dot clad cannonball in the middle of it.

And that's up to me too. *end rant*

[Nina]

this is not my forum....I read it since I am interested to know what people are saying 'n stuff...and sometimes I see the names of folks I stalk in here so I read it....(waves to Jo this morning)...

that said: it seems to me to be Very heavy handed, and pretty patronizing, to equate a line or two of lightness with coming into a cancer thread and talking baseball (I assume that's the red socks reference and not a fashion commentary?)...do we forget that one of the advantages of the internet is that we Do Not have to keep reading if we find, after the first few words, that what we are reading is not a good fit?...do we forget that when we are stern and do the public admonishment thing that other people, maybe some of the many folks who come and read and think and get something from this venue, may well think to themselves that they can't take the risk of posting lest they are deemed as not "enough" for the thread patrols?...

I have not said anything for a while, and not been sure If I had the 'right' to comment....this morning I feel I do...feel free to write this off to some 'oh that crazy-nina' thing...or,even better to have done, as I suggest and do myself, just stopped reading it when it became clear it was an annoyance or a derail or any other thing which didn't resonate...

[tapu]

Man, that Jo-babe really brings it.