Quote:
Originally Posted by Converse
This is interesting. So should I read this to mean that it is “Stone” rather than “Butch” that is the more relevant?
I wonder if a similar perception exists for Stone Butches i.e. that the “femme” is secondary to the “stone”, that the two words are separable- allowing Stone to be attached to any ID, gender etc while still retaining its attraction.
|
I'm attracted to butch women. Very butch women. I'm unlikely to pay much attention to a suitor who is not butch, but if a more androgynous lesbian were to pursue me, and she turned out to be both stone and a sadistic leather top, I might get interested.
My peculiar history of loss informs my choice in this. My late partner was not stone, and didn't ID as butch when she met me. Until then, she had been strenuously suppressing her naturally masculine nature. When she met me she was encouraged to express it for the first time. Ever. Eventually she became quite comfortable, and WOW! was she ever butch! Throughout that relationship I was as ignorant as I could be about my own stonefemme boundaries. I suffered from tremendous guilt after she died. Once I found out this very important thing about myself, I decided that it would be a very bad idea to date a non-stone butch because my guilt around her dissatisfaction is still profound. My late partner presented as kinda androgynous when she met me, but the other required elements were in place. Once she was allowed to be butch, it just flowed naturally.
My late gf, (yes, I lost my gf after I lost my partner), had always IDed as butch, and was nearly stone. That was AWESOME! Of course a stone butch leather top a lot like her would be a natural fit for me, but I wouldn't rule out an androgynous lesbian who is stone, because my experience tells me that it could end up working for me.