[aishah]

i don't have any good explanation for the word "center," personally, except for the fact that in the past gender has been understood as a spectrum, with masculinity on one end and femininity on the other, and some people still understand it that way. even if they acknowledge that it's imperfect. when we do gender 101 at the lgbt muslim retreat, we use the "genderbread" man, which makes heavy use of spectrum imagery to explain sex, gender, presentation, orientation, and all other sorts of things. assuming that everyone is on a spectrum, or occupies only one place on a spectrum, or isn't off in the abyss somewhere, is highly problematic. yet it is also primary way that sexual orientation and gender identity are communicated in the dominant euro-american culture.

while i was washing dishes, an analogy occurred to me. i don't know if this is helpful or not for folks who are resistant of any space they interact in being labeled "masculine of center." but...i hate the term "bisexual." i detest it. i think it is biologically essentializing and it marginalizes trans people. i don't feel that it describes me at all and i don't want it anywhere near me and it makes me feel 1000 different kinds of gross.

at the same time, i am a femme who is attracted to more than one gender. in that way, i share the lived experience with bisexual-id'ed people of being attracted to more than one gender. i share the lived experience of being labeled slutty, confused, not gay enough, not straight enough. in the lgbt acronym, i don't really feel all that included, but i understand more or less that the "b" is supposed to be inclusive of people like me. many of the main resources, publications, etc. about people who share my lived experiences use the term "bisexual." i may hate it and think it is a shitty descriptor, but if i want to interact with people who have similar lived experiences in mainstream spaces, "bisexual" is a commonly accepted descriptor, so i've learned to deal with it and try not to cringe too much.

from my understanding, the term "masculine of center" originated from the belief that butches, studs, transmen, aggressives, bois, etc. share similar lived experiences of transgressing gender boundaries and being marginalized because they present in ways traditionally understood as masculine but were assigned female at birth (and many still identify as female/woman). there are also many differences between them, but they share some commonalities.

i think it's also relevant to point out that the butch voices conference is called BUTCH voices, and the first identity listed under "what identities is this conference for" is BUTCH. not "masculine of center." so i don't really understand the freak-out over butch voices being taken over by the term "masculine of center." they didn't change the name to masculine of center voices...? they just attempted to be more inclusive by adding a term that has currency among butches/studs/aggressives/bois of color.

to me, building solidarity with other people who share similar struggles and lived experiences is more important than worrying about which label is used. i agree with the quote from the piece that was posted in the race thread that abstract battles over labels can sometimes get in the way of doing meaningful solidarity work. i don't think that we should never problematize labels. but...it seems like this battle has gotten in the way of building connections between predominantly white butch communities and masculine-of-center communities of color.