It certainly is a hurtful comment for me to see (even if wasn't said about me personally), but I do wish the couple and their family well.

http://cdn.buzznet.com/media-cdn/jj1...e-marinoni.jpg

They are a cute couple, aint they?
http://outprofessionals.files.wordpr...hia_nixon2.jpg
:)

Yep, gotta love the redheads!

You know...
 

... not to throw a monkey wrench into this very "lovely" conversation...

BUT, I was out tonight at my local VETS CLUB and Jeopardy was on - and someone commented on the one "GUY" on the show for having man boobs...

:|

So, what does THAT have to do with "anything"?!! Hmmmm...
__

To me, the argument that goes on and on and on here, is so very SAD.

And depending on a multitude of factors, leads us to discourse and then of COURSE, against each other........... and CLEARLY there are ally forces in tact... We'd be fucking liars to admit that is NOT TRUE!

Regardless, we go through the same ROMP over and over. And we DO wonder sometimes why we call ourselves "community", when clearly we are not even close to being kind and/or accepting to/with each other.

It DOES remind me of the years when the gay men and gay women could NOT get along - and for it was the tragic event of AIDS that brought us all close together (as did the transgendered community).

And someone mentioned, if WE cannot get along here how can anyone else respect us, for our differences. OR/and... if we cannot accept what folks say publicly about us, and even FROM OUR OWN COMMUNITY (and there is no such thing as "perfection", it's LIVE AND LEARN BABY!), THEN YES, we are going to have to get set back YEARS for this lack of understanding when someone words things a certain way. Does it negate the "new generation" though?

Hell no! Actually, FUCK NO.

It is NOT about that. Can folks just respect that someone like Heart is standing up for OUR rights and NOT take it fucking personal? She has already said... "FINE HOWEVER, WHATEVER anyone wants to ID as..." But, really, many ARE missing the point... SOMEONE LIKE ME, LIKE IT OR NOT... as a proud lesbian BUTCH is getting the shaft. WHY take that personal if it does NOT belong to you? I don't understand that.

It seems like BOTH "SIDES" (which really SHOULD there should BE SIDES??!!) are taking things personal and being defensive, AND........... most importantly - NOT SUPPORTING EACH OTHER AS PART OF A COMMUNITY!!

You know, I am starting to wonder, IS THERE A COMMMUNITY HERE?

Gracias,
WILDCAT

Of course there is, Wildcat. :) and with every community comes disagreements. I love the passion I see here (on all 'sides' if you will).

My thoughts get scrambled around all of this. So I can only go at this from a 'me' perspective/observations.

Language and construction of language is challenge even for those of us participating in some form of a queer community.. be it online or real time.

I think of the phrase as an unfortunate sound bite, in a sea of consistent, persistent sound bite(s) that attempt to 'explain' the appearance of a masculine woman. In this case, until Christine specifies anything else, I will see her/respect her as a woman.

There's a lot of erasing of butch women in masse media. Would anyone like to dispute this?

For example, when has there ever been a commercial for female hygiene that included a masculine-appearing woman? Or ANY commercial where there's a masculine woman?

There was an ad that ran in Canada for AutoTrader about 4 years ago. I encourage the curious to click through and read some of the comments.


here, I'll help:

"Lesbian? That was just a normal Canadian guy." (that response got 2 thumbs up )

"Best Canadian Commercial Ever! This is funny, it kinda looks like my Aunt!!! (She isn't a lesbian though" (nice assumption that she's a lesbian.not... is it because masculine women ONLY exist in the lesbian community? (as a former married woman, living as a straight woman, I find that equally erasing)

Face it, many people reduce and form their opinions/assumptions on sound bites and clips and see nothing else.

Some uninformed, unsophisticated folks who have some understanding of my transition assumed I had 'a dick sewn on'. Why? "Well, all you gotta do is just look at him." So in this guy's mind.... there was NO WAY I could *possibly* be as masculine looking as I was (post-hormones) without that god almighty dick. ... I'm not sure if it's a polar opposite to this or analogous but let me know. :)

I'm curious, and maybe some Oprah fans can jump in. But in the past year she's interviewed a couple of transmen, including Thomas who gave birth. There's been discussions and interviews with other transgendered folks, intersexed folks, etc. I *am* pleased to see our stories coming up more and more. Chaz is now in that category.

But, when was there ever an interview with a woman on Oprah where self identified butch woman had a change to discuss her story as a butch Woman with a capital W?

Finally, I want to end on this very chilling point. A factual observation that can't be denied:

Most of us are aware of about three main butch/femme related sites, and a lot of us have participated in at least two of those sites if not all three. On one site, I made the observation about a year ago that the keywords used as part of the description for the site did not include "butch woman" or "butch women" anywhere. It remains that way *to this day*.

Of the three, which one lists "Butch Women", "Lesbian Women", "Gay Women", "Femme Women" etc.. ?

You know the answer: ButchFemmePlanet.com ; in fact, in the keywords alone, "woman" or "women" is mentioned 10 times.

The other two sites I'm thinking about: not a single "woman" reference ANYwhere in the keywords.

That fact alone, in my humble opinion is equally disconcerting as Cynthia's comments about her partner, if not moreso, because I do believe as self-appointed leaders, activists, allies, etc... I do expect much more care and awareness in this matter.

Oh, and lastly? Of the two that DON'T specify "women" in the keywords, on one of those sites "male" is mentioned twice (granted, in the context of 'Female to Male' and 'Male to Female')

If anyone is curious and would like more information or would learn how to spot this, let me know. I know this techno-geeky stuff can be a bit ... daunting to some. I am personally a stickler for this information because I know that keywords and descriptions are perpetuated across the internet via search engines and blogs and what not. A lot of the time, search engines and directories is how we find each other. (Bulldog, Linus, back me up! LOL)

It might look like I'm nit picking. You bet I am. I am because I hate seeing my past, and my friends, and my allies consistently erased or misunderstood and/or under represented especially within our own back yard.

K, I'm outta steam.

Thank you again, Heart for opening this discussion.

This is worth repeating. I am a little surprized at many of the responses.........but I guess I shouldn't be.......after all butch=man.

I do appreciate that on this website butch includes women as far as the founders believe.....not found (as Chris pointed out) on the other two sites. And apparently lots of folks still don't see how harmful the language of 'short man with boobs' is in defining what woman means.

Thanks Heart.........as always you speak up about how the definition of woman needs to be more inclusive.

Chris, my fellow geek, you know I will always back you up! Yes, I compared the meta keywords for BFP and another butch femme site. Butch woman and femme woman are listed for BFP, not the other site. The other site does list masculine identified butches as one of their keywords, no other qualifiers for butch.

Keywords are how people find things on the internet, so yes it makes a big difference. It also makes a big difference to me to see the effort of inclusiveness being put forth by the owners, Admins and moderators of this website.

One of the several things that has really irritated me about this conversation is this casting into doubt whether Christine Marinoni is a woman or not. All it takes is a 30 second Google search to find out. I notice no one was questioning whether Cynthia Nixon was a woman or not.

Anyway this what Cynthia had to say in an interview a few years ago:

"In terms of my sexual orientation, I don't really feel that I changed," she says. "I don't feel any different than I did before. I don't feel like there was some hidden part of myself that I wasn't aware of.

"I had been with men all my life and I had never met a woman I had fallen in love with before. But when I did it didn't seem so strange.

"I don't define myself. I'm just a woman in love with another woman."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...#ixzz0njPIPyhC

They're both women. They are partners. They are raising their children. One of them has a masculine appearance and wears male clothing. She's a woman.

Im SO glad you found these quotes Bully!

This is kinda the crux of what I was arguing earlier. Self-Identity.

These quotes refer to Cynthia Nixon identifying her partner as a woman. She has also (now in the article we are discussing) identified her partner as "basically a man with boobs".

I haven't seen anything where her *partner* self-identified. (although I will totally concede that it is highly unlikely that her partner identifies herseld as a "man with boobs") :)

And don't get me wrong Bully, I *do* get what you are saying and love that we are all kinda teasing this thing out together.

This conversation IS important, even if we only reiterate to one another how we want to be seen and discussed within the context of this community. :) I think that's valuable.

It's true we only hear from Cynthia Nixon- she's the celebrity. The entire fabric of Christine Marinoni's life that we see is as an out masculine lesbian/queer woman. It's not just about a personal identity label. It's how she lives her life and how she deals with everyone's reactions to her.

In many ways she has a textbook lesbian bio, lol. She discovered feminism in college, opened a lesbian bar, became a teacher and education activist and is now partnered with a woman and their two children. I want to honor and respect her path. It's very similar to mine, as a masculine appearing, out woman. That's how I travel through the world too.

After four pages of dialogue, I'll give it to you that not "everybody" is discussing it, but those that are are pretty vocal about it.

*grin*


I can see better now how the comment made is hurtful. I do not, however, believe it was intentionally so.


She'd get a second glance, but I believe there's still a law on the books of NY that would allow that.

*thinks about dredging up FYI thread*

I also take the intentions of the speaker into account. The intentions don't appear to be hurtful. Clumsy, yes. Awkward, yes. Limiting, yes. Unfortunate, yes.

One thing that frustrates me and makes my head throb in these discussions of this caliber is that those explaining their viewpoint don't stick to the situation at hand. They drag up other circumstances....What ifs?....that don't apply to the exact discussion at hand.

I acknowledge that I'm not the sharpest crayon in the box but please don't veer off with a situation that hasn't occurred just to make your (general your) current point.

Heart, I'm not necessarily addressing you specifically about this. Your post here is an example. :)

I appreciate you breaking it down like this. It's much more helpful to me than creating fictional situations.


"Apprentice" queers. I like that and what you are saying here.

I feel as if all kinds of blame is being assigned here and for what?

How many times are we told "be nice to the newbies", "don't scare the newbies; they are learning", or something along those lines. Okay, maybe that's just me. :blink:

She's new in our world and yet, because her comment was made in a public way, we are in lynch mob mentality? How can we expect her, or any person who hasn't lived for a long time in our world, to say things the way we want them to be said. Again, we can't pick and choose the way our community is shown. It would be nice but is unrealistic.

I understand the comment's hurtful potential and reality. I understand that if it was twisted and spoken about other members of our community how upset THOSE members would be. I also think that raising those situations causes unnecessary distress, but hey, that's just me. I like to address things as they come, for the most part. I plan for tornadoes or earthquakes; not for the occasional hurtful comment made from someone who doesn't affect my day to day existence.

I do, however, think they are a lovely couple, I hope they make it and I hope that, as time goes by, both grow to be strong forces in our community, so that Dylan can remember their names.

No one has attacked Cynthia Nixon. I agree it was an unfortunate remark. That's not the point. Heart has already explained what her point was multiple times.

Why are masculine women almost always "othered" as men? Why can't masculine women be honored and respected as women?

It's not just Cynthia Nixon's remark. This thread is a perfect illustration.

I have no fricken idea who Cynthia X is, it's the first time I've heard her name. I don't care, at all, either. I've never watched Sex in the City, maybe the sexism people are saying it represents is discussion worthy... but I think conversations about how butch women are portrayed and reduced to a short man with boobs is worth having.

I don't think Heart wanted to discuss at all the repercussions of what Cynthia-in-particular says on the queer community, or critique her- but rather used the comment as a kick-start to discuss how female masculinity and butch women are thought of as men, portrayed male wannabes, dogged and stereotyped due to a patriarchal society full of sexism, misogyny... homophobia. (I don't know exactly where she wanted it to go but that's what I'm getting)

She's said several times it's not about Cynthia OR how here partner ID's but for some reason that's getting ignored, derailed and buried in favor of "who cares what Cynthia Nixon said, and there's more worthy conversations to be had" basically.

It's not just about "Cynthia's" comment, it's all the comments, comments that followed it by the general public... (manlady, wonder if her mustache is red, she's a TG'd Mason Reese, not a woman, 16 yr old boy etc etc etc).... it's about the bullshit butch women get nailed with in real life... how masculine women, female masculinty is reduced essentially to a "a short man with boobs".

I don't want to be seen as a man, at this point in my life I don't even want to pass and the general misinformation's that butches want to look like, emulate or want to be men, is worthy of examining and the whys seem like a worthy conversation here in BFP, to me.

I don't care who doesn't... but obviously members of the butch femme planet who are affected by it do, that should be enough.

Heart, thanks for starting this convo, and thanks to all that have cared enough to keep it going.

Peace,
Metro

Yesterday when I was posting I was getting ready for work. I actually typed with one hand and brushed my hair with the other, then typed with one hand and did up my bra with the other. So I didn't have time to expound.

Here we go.

I agree that her wordage is unfortunate. But I also think, that since she is -not- a member of the Butch+Femme community (I don't mean online, I mean from my understanding of her words that is not her ID or how she views her relationship) it's unsurprising that she didn't have a more savvy way to voice what she wanted to say. And, again, while her wordage was unfortunate it's very -very- clear that she wasn't making a sweeping generalisation about the Butch (upper case B, here) community at large.

Only very stupid people are going to read her comments and think "omg! I was so right! Butch women just want to be men!" because only very stupid people think it's appropriate/sensible/sane to paint entire groups of people with one brush like that. And those very stupid people would have thought what they thought no matter what Nixon had said - even if Nixon had given a 14 page essay on gender, those very stupid people would have been like "omg she is ugly and mannish!".

In fact - we have no way of knowing what all Nixon had to say on the subject. She could very well have said some well-thought-out and sensitive things, which were largely ignored by the Advocate (which is a shitty magazine for very stupid Queer people) in favour of printing the easypeasy pat one-liner. Are we also cross with the Advocate for so irresponsibly printing something that would cause all of this kerfuffle?

I don't believe for a second that she thinks that the only way to be appropriately female is to be feminine. I also don't believe for a second that any of the people in this thread who don't think what she said is worth all this uproar think that the only legitimate way to be female is to be feminine.

But I do have a question. If comparing a masculine female to a man is upsetting...is it also upsetting when someone refers to their (female identified) lover as "Daddy" "Sir" "My Husband" etc. I get that those words do not mean "man" to us in this community - but I also get that those are words that have been used to describe men in various positions...well, for as long as those words have existed. Should we as a community reject those words? Should we be making up new words?

I'm not trying to be a shit-disturber by asking that question. I genuinely can't wrap my head around how one thing is diminishing and the other is perfectly acceptable. We cannot have it both ways.

It's Not About Cynthia Nixon!
 

Once again, as we repeat ourselves over and over:

I am wondering why nobody (especially those who are of the "it is unacceptable to every compare a masculine woman to a man" camp) bothered to point out how uncool it is to just go about and defacto refer to every Butch (or butch) person on the planet as "he" regardless of what their own preferred pronoun is. Because -that- is one of my own pet-peeves.

Well then how about I repeat my question, since you clearly did not actually read my post just now.

hello again
 

For those who keep making this about CN, and saying that we have no idea what her personal identity and relationship is all about, you sure seem to know a lot about whether she understands BF lingo, queer culture, etc. Who the heck knows? But she is a smart, successful woman, who has supported both feminist and queer causes, and who has been in a queer relationship for quite a while now in New York City. She and her partner do not live under a rock. In light of that, I personally think her remark was careless and stupid and minimizing of masculine/butch women. I also think it probably was off-the-cuff and unintentional.

BUT as I've said 50 times in this thread, in fact I said it in my very first 2-sentence post, my point was how routine that kind of minimization is, how little we even notice it, and then how ferociously we justify it when its pointed out. This thread bears that out. We would never see this kind of response if a transman's identity was belittled, in fact I have seen the partners of transmen, often femmes, get called on the carpet and lectured about the ways that they need to uphold their partners identities.

So men's identities are delicate and valuable and must be preserved, but women's identities get no such regard. Interesting.

Anyhoo -- I think Bete asked a good question. It may be a different thread, but it's a good question. Bete - I think those words you mentioned are often erotically charged, which makes them quite different than routinely referring to butches as men I, however, would never call my female butch partner my "husband."

Heart

What about "Dude" "Bro" "Man"? (Man as in "Don't bogart that can, man" not as in MAN) "Bud" even, as far as I'm concerned, has male connotations. That shit gets thrown around constantly, and nobody bats an eye. I still fail to see how this is any different.

Hmmm... I kinda feel now like you''re just baiting me. I guess if you don't see the diff between generic "hay man," or " hey dude," and the way that CN attempted to explain/define her masculine female partner to the world as a "man with boobs" -- well, there sure isn't anything I'm gonna say that will make you see the difference.

By-the-way, recently when a male id'ed butch who is organizing on behalf of other butches of various identities referred to "brotherhood," I asked him if his organizing included "sisterhood." He allowed that it did.

Peace out dude.
Heart

I am not trying to bait you. I am simply drawing a parallel between describing a masculine female as "man with boobs" and referring to masculine females (regardless of their ID, level of relationship, preferred pronoun, etc) as "he" (cuz, lemme tell you - some Butches hate that) "husband" "bro" etc. BOTH of those practices insinuate that the masculine female is less....female.

And don't you ever call me dude again, are we understood? I would accept being called bitch before I would accept being called dude - now who's baiting whom?

Huh? Attempt at levity - nothing more.

Soooooooooooooooooo.... this was fun.