![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
Senior Member
How Do You Identify?:
The original lime-twisted femme Preferred Pronoun?:
I answer to most things, especially lesbian. Relationship Status:
Still loving my Mare ;) ![]() Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 4,683
Thanks: 1,343
Thanked 11,420 Times in 2,976 Posts
Rep Power: 21474855 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]()
High femme to me is a high maintenance femme - one who is - yes - fussy - over makeup, heels, appearance, and carries the attitude and the demeanor.
... when I think of high femme, I think of my old friend Stephanie - always dressed to the nines in her skirts (she NEVER EVER EVER wore pants - in fact, the one day she came to my house wearing jeans, (this was after having a lengthy conversation about her wardrobe) I damn near died, lol), makeup always impeccable and flawless, high heels that shot her into another galaxy (she was a tall drink of water to begin with) - she always fussed and demanded the very best. She was a sweetheart, but good lord she could really fuss up a storm. I referred to her as ultra-femme - if I were to consider a pyramid of femme-ness - Steph would be sitting right on top. Do I think of all high femmes this way? Not necessarily, but, in a way yes - when I consider attitude, demeanor and aesthetics. Side note: I know very few high femme submissives. Low femme would be the opposite (IMO). Low maintenance femme makes me think of a 'casual' femme - more down to earth in appearance and 'tude. Not as fussy aesthetically speaking, but femme non the less. Yet, to sound contradictory to my pyramid statement, it's difficult for me to perceive a "ranking system" for anyone. I don't think an ultra or high femme is "above" a low and/or casual femme. The pyramid I am referring to would be based on purely aesthetics. This may sound redundant, but I base opinions of people on WHO they are, not WHAT they are, or HOW they perceive themselves to be. When I think of "ranking" - I think of who is better than who - who stands above someone else - and I find that to be difficult for me, since I base my opinions on people based on who/how they are as a human being - not how a person dresses and/or portrays themselves to the world - and not based on what title they hold in life. Issues about not being femme enough have (more-or-less) the same conflicts as not being butch enough. IMO, it's all based on opinions, and opinions are - loaded guns with serious implications. I don't think any less of myself because I am not ultra or high femme - and I wouldn't tolerate anyone making me think that I am. It's about preference. If I am not femme enough for someone - that's okay - I am not going to make myself into something I'm not because I think of a "ranking system". I guess when I continue to read that some are having self-issues with the level of femme-ness they possess (or don't) - it bothers me a little. You are who you are, and that doesn't make you (collectively) less than. It doesn't make them (collectively) better. Well, thank you for putting up with my morning rant. ![]() I will now consume copious amounts of coffee, with the hopes that everything I just said made some kind of sense. Cheers. ![]()
__________________
|
![]() |
![]() |
Tags |
femme, masculine-centrism |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|