I remembered when I learned that a lot of gay men in Detroit -- and elsewhere I am sure -- ID'd as homosexual, but not gay. This was in the 90's. Even after the early days of HIV and the organizing around it -- and the contact that created between privileged white gay men and everyone else -- a lot of African American gay men had no sense that they belonged in the gay community. And I mean out, exclusively homosexual men. My best friend back home is an African American gay man. He ID's as gay. He has white gay friends, but over time his community became more African American -- and gay or homosexual. But the more contact I had with his world -- I'd always had a fair amt of contact with white gay men -- the more I realized how much fucking WORK it is for Black men to deal with gay white men and their world. It's tiring. And it's just not home for many of them. So I had a lot of respect for the men who didn't ID as gay. One had a Ph.D. and was a professional queer -- ran an agency. So he had had extensive contact with white institutions. But he still did not ID as gay. Again, totally respect that. White gay male culture just wasn't a fit. Wasn't home. Had never been welcoming to many African American men.

So I get that. I get not feeling a strong pull toward identifiers that maybe never worked for you. I have no problem with anyone ID'ing or self-describing any way they want.

And truly I am not interested in BV politics.

But MoC is put forward as an umbrella term to INCLUDE butch women and other folks. If they don't fit under the umbrella, are they no longer included?

ANd if it's OK with you to not include specific groups, yer making a statement, moving your politics and your community in a particular direction -- deliberately.

But all that aside, my objections to the term do not come from an attachment to other terms. For one thing, I am not butch. I think that foregrounding gender presentation, and calling it masculine, is highly questionable, even without the idea of a spectrum or a center.

It's not just that it excludes people. It makes masculinity the defining characteristic of members of the group. Well, guess what, sometimes I am masculine. I do not ID as MoC or butch or any of the things in those lists. And sometimes my masculinity is not just how I dress, but something deeply internal. Why is masculinity the province of someone else? And have those same people abjured femininity? If so, what kind of sexist consequences are we gonna see from that??

And come on, seriously, isn't creating a gender label called masculine anything and using the word "center" putting oneself on the male side of the conventional binary without problematizing it? Isn't it then reinforcing the binary? To pretend otherwise is naive, in my opinion. Some people won't find that a problem. That's cool. But others will. And if they do not feel comfortable being described as MoC, does that limit their presence in the community if the term gains currency?

I would just like to reiterate that while masculinity has always been a characteristic of butches, transmen, generqueer and others, it has not necessarily been the defining characteristic.

Making it the defining quality makes me wanna urp. I LIKE masculinity. I think it is HOT. Do not get me wrong. But if it is the defining quality of butches, for example, that makes everything else that butches are secondary or individual qualities, not as noteworthy somehow.

It encourages a hyper awareness and valorization of masculinity. That's not where I'd go if it were my ID, my umbrella term.

Isn't that already a kind of bone of contention among some members of the groups covered by the term? So to make it part of the umbrella term pretty much decides the issue -- in favor of the folks who foreground masculine gender presentation as part of their ID.

That to me is an issue that might also be generational. African American butches of MY generation often did their nails and wore earrings -- the dangly kind. I am serious. Lots of Black butches in my day had some interesting combinations of masculine and feminine going on in their gender presentation. Still do.

ANd seriously, as an older person, some of the least pleasing things I have witnessed among younger folks has been when they have worked a lot too hard on being masculine rather than being who they are in all their glory.

well, the term was coined by a butch woman. so...? i guess it is inclusive of butch women who identify with it and some butch women do not identify with it? because many butch women of color do id as masculine of center, i don't think the term is meant to be exclusive of butch women.

the pdf i linked to from brown boi talks a bit about why they choose specifically to focus on masculinity as a characteristic (because masculine id'ed folks of color face specific challenges that they feel need to be addressed and they work to address that). i am guessing that might give more context to why b. cole chooses to specifically use the word masculine.

to be honest, i am not going to lose any sleep over the fear of white butches being "limited" if the term gains currency. i don't think poc queer culture or our language is in any way a threat to the mainstream white queer culture.

edited to add - from the pdf -

I wasn't thinking of white butches. I didn't say white. You did.

I think a LOT of African American butches of my generation wouldn't resonate at all.

Re your last sentence I am not defending white queer culture. Wow. That's a leap.

i can't speak to that, since the only butch folks i've seen argue against the term masculine of center have been white. when i see a large number of folks of color start speaking out against the term masculine of center and say that they feel marginalized by younger folks of color, then i will be concerned by that. nevertheless that's a discussion that is internal to the poc community, and white folks leveraging the experiences of older butches of color to support their arguments is in my opinion not appropriate.

How likely do you think these women are to even be at a venue where you'd have the discussion? And how likely will they be if they are by definition excluded?

Even the use of the term "boy" in that quote excludes quite a few people.

"Leveraging" -- I am not using anyone's experience. I haven't cited a single person. I have speculated.
Good god.

I was making a point about gender. I get to do that. That the author of that piece quoted in the race thread and perhaps you too think that because this term comes from the organizing of progressive PoC, it gets to go unexamined -- wishful thinking.

well, considering that i'm pretty involved in various intergenerational lesbian and queer spaces for poc and indigenous folks, i have the feeling i wouldn't be completely oblivious. it's always a possibility, though.

from my experiences with bbp, i have the feeling that if any older butches of color brought these concerns to them, or had any advice for how to improve their work with young people of color, they would be very receptive to listening.

the term "masculine of center" was coined by a black butch who runs an organization for masculine folks of color, and it is only widely used in poc communities. personally, i don't find it a shock that the backlash against it has mainly come from white people. its adoption in butch voices and other spaces, from my understanding, has partly been an attempt to widen its use as an umbrella term and partly an attempt (although one people think is bad?) to be more inclusive.

you get to make points about gender. i get to make points about race. i have not let anything go unexamined, but thanks for accusing me of not being able to think critically about issues related to an issue in my own community. i have never in any discussion i've participated in on bfp tried to get out of thinking critically about anything. i might be wrong and fuck up but i do not let anything go unexamined. i'm really insulted that you are accusing me of that.

I have no idea what BBP is. This could be as you say. I can't say that it's not true. But I do think that the objections to the term are re the gender politics. The writer of the article in the race thread did not imply otherwise. He simply suggested backing down off one's privileged horse and allowing others to get the opportunity to name for once.

Not an argument that resonates for me when the gender politics are so fucked up. SO FUCKED UP.

from butch voices:

"We are woman-identified Butches. We are trans-masculine Studs. We are faggot-identified Aggressives. We are noun Butches, adjective Studs and pronoun-shunning Aggressives. We are she, he, hy, ze, zie and hir. We are you, and we are me. The point is, we don’t decide who is Butch, Stud or Aggressive. You get to decide for yourself."

Read what I said. I said -- or meant to say -- that anyone who expects others -- the world -- to not examine the term, take it apart, look at it, see if it works -- just because it came out of a progressive movement of PoC is engaging in some wishful thinking.

It doesn't matter what you say UNDER the term. The point is the term. That's what is going to be used. It's beyond naive not to get that.

http://brownboiproject.org/ - the person who coined "masculine of center" is the founder of brown boi project and is on the advisory board of butch voices.

i'd be interested to actually see refutations of the way brown boi project understands and discusses masculinity/"masculine of center" rather than general statements that the gender politics of "masculine of center" and "feminine of center" are fucked up.

also generalization that the gender politics are "so fucked up" - so are all of us who use these terms just wrong about gender? i mean? that is kind of overreaching.

OH MY EFFING GOD.

martina, i have NOT SAID ONCE that people should not examine the term or take it apart.

i HAVE tried to introduce context for how the term came about and how and why it is used.

my point is trying to have an abstract discussion about a term that is not rooted in its history and context is hella fucked up. pretty much all the posts in this thread are against the term being used. few have bothered to acknowledge where the term came from, why it came about in the first place, or bothered to try to understand why other people might find it useful. ZERO context whatsoever.

oh, and i did read what you said. you out and out said that i am arguing against examining something critically JUST because it came out of progressive poc community. that is DISGUSTING and minimizing and if anyone here thinks that about me then clearly y'all don't know me all that well.