Open Letter: Dear Femme

[Linus]

e, as I read your response to Ben-Hur I was thinking of my wife, K, and how she has evolved in her definition of femme. I have found that it evolves over time as she does and she redefines it again and again in her own terms. She has many roles (i.e., student, wife, partner, friend, lover, social worker-to-be, daughter, sister) and desires (mostly related to wanting to be a mom and license social worker as well as to have me permanently around her) but in her core, from my POV, there remains that femme that comes through -- both in the superficial visible and the deep inner being.

I wanted to find a way to define this and so I did my usual Google search. This time I entered in "define femme" and hit upon the nefarious Wikipedia's (yes, yes, I'm the biggest advocate of staying away from there but I got distracted and.. oh! Shiny!) definition: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Femme and was surprised. Lots of mention of what a butch is but very little mention of what a femme is (in fact, unless my old eyes are failing me I can't find a true definition in there other than the fact that the term is a derivative of the french term for woman). HUH? A woman's woman? Maybe that's it.

She is what a woman strives to be: strong in her own right and knows when to let her guard down. I'd almost say that my aunts and grandmother fit into this except they miss that one last key point: they are straight. Part of what makes a femme a "woman's woman" is that she sees love in others that society turns their back on. She is, to me, stronger than narrowness of society.

My brain has more to add, if it's ok, but I cannot find the words. It'll come, I'm sure. (not like I'm known for brevity )

[evolveme]

Originally Posted by julieisafemme

I am using your post super duper Femme to write my own letter to the baby femme that is me. We hear about baby butches a lot. I am a baby femme at the ripe old age of 43! Anyway this is me writing to the new fresh femme me. Yes this is all about me. Hee hee.

Dear Baby Femme-

Why are you scared of femmes? Why do you feel like you are back in the sixth grade? Why are you intimidated by someone who identifies as a high femme? I think it is because you feel less than. I think it is coming from inside and not how anyone else identifies. Can you see that? Can you see that creating hierarchies is bad for you?

I know you feel like a big loser sometimes because you are new. I know you feel defined by others because your first and only partner is a transmasculine butch. It's ok for you to identify and call yourself whatever you like.

It's scary to be in a group of women. That has sometimes not gone so well for you in the past. I know it is easier to focus on the masculine beings in your midst.

I know you feel out of place in a group of femmes without the straight married mom mask you used to wear. It is just another aspect of coming out. Maybe life can be more now than just talking about kids, vacations, home renovations and other things that never interested you in the first place. I know you have seen how exciting it is to be around people who talk about ideas instead of things.

Don't judge yourself so much. Take a chance. Put yourself out there. You can't hide behind your wall forever. Or I guess you can but look at all the wonderful things that have happened since you have taken it down, just a little bit at a time!

Love You very very much my sweet baby femme.

Julie

Dear Julie Baby Femme,

I don't know how I missed this.

Thank you for reminding me what that time felt like. The freedom and the vulnerability and the fear and the fucking wonder.

I remember exactly how cool it was to finally find women that wanted to talk about ideas instead of bake sales too.

You even made me cry a little bit. I don't want to have to tell you how incredibly hard this has become for me.

I'm glad I get to witness you.

With a whole lot of love in your direction,

e

[blush]

Originally Posted by evolveme

This is for both Blush and Kosmo, and really anyone else that thought I might be asserting something negative(?) about a particular set of gay males.

Relational Aggression is a theory of social psychology. I believe that whenever it is not acceptable or ALLOWABLE for the human animal to attend to their aggressions openly as masculine people more often do (via threats, intimidation, posturing or acts of socially condoned violence) that she or he will attend to them in a relational way. So not only do we see these behaviors in the culture of certain gay males, but also in the business/organizational culture.

I simply didn't want to go into all of that as it isn't relative to the feminine people on the whole and how women and girls are primarily socialized.

I didn't think anything negative, it just jumped out at me.

I'm familiar with that theory, although I probably need to brush up on it.

I would call it into question when applied to the queer community.

Come to Austin for coffee and we'll debate, yes?

[blush]

Originally Posted by SyrJess

Feeling a need to post something.. anything just to say thank you to all of you for just being. The willingness and openness with which this thread has progressed is absolutely beautiful, powerful and passionate.

I love my grown ass woman, the "femme" to my "butch" not for her support of "me" but for the exacting entity that she is. She is strong, tender, gracious, protective, elegant, driven. My girl and my grown ass woman all day, everyday.

I love you all for being exactly whom you all are and for what my perfection is as well. For me, THIS is what the butch-femme dynamic is about. It isn't so much about completing the duality as it is the reverence for that which is familiar strange, reflected and reciprocated between the two.

This is one of those times when my words will surely fail me, so I will remain brief.

In awe,
Jess

Jess,
This is a beautiful testament to femmes, and to YOUR femme.

[evolveme]

Originally Posted by Arwen

[FONT=Georgia][SIZE=3][COLOR=Purple]
Do you think we (girls) were taught to internalize our rage as opposed to hit or fight physically like boys so that we were more controllable? I mean not necessarily intentionally in this day and age, but back when this "feminine corralling" started? I am not sure I'm making sense.

I do think women punish one another by shunning them. I don't know what men do. But the ostracization is stunningly effective on many of us because it feeds directly into that fear of not being good enough. Not an "A" femme.

What I believe is that the result of teaching women/girls to "be good" and "not fight" was that they were made easier to control. What I believe is that the primary incentive was an evolutionary one: if females acted out aggressions physically they would be too likely to miscarry. This would directly impact the survival of our species in a negative way at a time when it mattered, i.e. a long ass time ago when we hadn't yet overfuckingpopulated the planet.

In this way, I believe that tools of the patriarchy, and the patriarchy itself, arose out of an evolutionary incentive. Their time has come and gone.

This belief is not a popular one. I'm sure you can see why.

And I could talk a long time about it, but I won't. <cheesy grin>

[evolveme]

Originally Posted by SyrJess

I don't allow her anything. She is, therefore, she deserves. She was a "strong, tender, gracious, protective, elegant, driven" woman BEFORE we met. This is whom I was attracted to then and it hasn't changed.

I knew my words would fail me and in an attempt to simply say thank you, THIS is how we can easily become silenced. ( Some folks asked for examples. Here is one). Sometimes, as it has been pointed out, we use different vernaculars or even "less words" to say something poignant. I said thank you, I will leave it at that.

I quibbled with myself over the word "allow," and should have changed it. I didn't intend it in the way that you interpreted, I think. I wanted to speak to "butch to my femme" and I wasn't alone in that. I also spoke to you privately and publicly about my fond feelings for your devotional post.

I'm not sure if you're saying you feel silenced by me. If you are, I'm going to have to ask that you reconsider my intentions, which were only to highlight the ways we might be unconsciously subsumed and dismissed. Beyond that, it is contrary to the purpose of this thread for me to host your feelings.

[evolveme]

Originally Posted by blush

I didn't think anything negative, it just jumped out at me.

I'm familiar with that theory, although I probably need to brush up on it.

I would call it into question when applied to the queer community.

Come to Austin for coffee and we'll debate, yes?

Only if you bake me a pie.

[Diva]

Originally Posted by evolveme

Only if you bake me a pie.

Vote for apple.
Jus' sayin'.....

[blush]

Originally Posted by evolveme

See, I saw this as problematic too, Jess. Even though you go on to say, "not for her support of me, but for the exact entity that she is."

While I love the love and respect you are showing her here, I also want to see you simply allow her the autonomy and agency she deserves (not that I believe you are necessarily disrespecting her). I understand that "the dance" has us thinking often of the bright space between us, the sharp contrast. But what was it about her that you loved before she was yours?

Who is she fundamentally? How can you define her without mentioning a role she inhabits (lover, sister, mother, friend)?

Tell us about her independent of you or even what she means to you.

I want to know if we are ever seen clearly enough in the skin we're in, or if we're always bleeding into our roles.

Gawd, I want to needlepoint your last sentence on a pillow.

And I've been thinking a lot about what you've said about roles.

And that got me thinking about my child. If I were to ask her to describe me without referencing the fact that I am her mother, would she be able to do it to my satisfaction?

No.

If I were to ask a friend to describe me without referencing my role or my contribution to their life as a friend, would they be able to do it to my satisfaction?

Probably not.

Your post resonated with me, e, but I don't know why. SyrJess's post resonated with me, but I don't know why.

My question is this:
Is it asking too much for our masculine counterparts to separate themselves from their devotion to us as life partners(or what-have-yous) and "objectively" describe us without mentioning our role in the relationship?

[evolveme]

Originally Posted by blush

My question is this:
Is it asking too much for our masculine counterparts to separate themselves from their devotion to us as life partners(or what-have-yous) and "objectively" describe us without mentioning our role in the relationship?

It may be difficult, but I don't think it is impossible.

I want them to understand why it is so important.

[Arwen]

Originally Posted by blush

My question is this:
Is it asking too much for our masculine counterparts to separate themselves from their devotion to us as life partners(or what-have-yous) and "objectively" describe us without mentioning our role in the relationship?

Do you think those who are partnered can do that for their partners as well?

Sometimes the English language is far too small for the concepts and ideas we need to express.

I have to anchor things with symbols that mean something to me.

Good mom
Wicked Stepmother
Prince Charming
Black Knight
Hermit
Cheerleader

Then I can expand around those word anchors. I am not sure any one can describe themselves in a way that they would find satisfying.

When I try...I start with labels. Femme, queer, poet, author, aunt....

So without those labels, who am I? Who are you?

Does this make sense? I fear I am missing my own point again.

[blush]

Originally Posted by Arwen

Do you think those who are partnered can do that for their partners as well?

Sometimes the English language is far too small for the concepts and ideas we need to express.

I have to anchor things with symbols that mean something to me.

Good mom
Wicked Stepmother
Prince Charming
Black Knight
Hermit
Cheerleader

Then I can expand around those word anchors. I am not sure any one can describe themselves in a way that they would find satisfying.

When I try...I start with labels. Femme, queer, poet, author, aunt....

So without those labels, who am I? Who are you?

Does this make sense? I fear I am missing my own point again.

Totally get what you're saying...

I think I'm being a tad more specific and asking is it possible for our masculine counterparts to describe us adequately without referencing the role we hold in their life.

[Diva]

I would HOPE that ANYone in a relationship, would be able to describe their partner's heart FIRST.

This ~ granted ~ is only MY opinion. But if someone tells me they have fallen in love with me because I'm a femme....or a woman.....or Irish.....or a Mom.....or whatEVER OTHER than who I am in my heart, I would question it. And of course, it would be up to ME to speak my heart....and up to THEM to listen and hear my heartbeat.

Geez, I don't feel I'm choosing the right words here, so please forgive me for my inadequacies.....

That is not to say that I don't have the heart of a woman....or a femme...etc.....

My heart is full of who I am.

[hippieflowergirl]

Originally Posted by Arwen

Do you think those who are partnered can do that for their partners as well?

Sometimes the English language is far too small for the concepts and ideas we need to express.

I have to anchor things with symbols that mean something to me.

Good mom
Wicked Stepmother
Prince Charming
Black Knight
Hermit
Cheerleader

Then I can expand around those word anchors. I am not sure any one can describe themselves in a way that they would find satisfying.

When I try...I start with labels. Femme, queer, poet, author, aunt....

So without those labels, who am I? Who are you?

Does this make sense? I fear I am missing my own point again.

spoken language is so damn limiting, isn't it? i find myself flailing for ways to adequately express the damn chaos in my damn mind. dammit.

i just finished rereading one of my fave science fiction books (octavia butler) about a species (wholly peaceful, thank the stars) that could link in to the nervous system of others and understand every damn thing without having to say a damn word. i don't know if i'd love it or hate it but i damn sure wouldn't mind trying it for a day.

(any guesses about my word of the day?)

[hippieflowergirl]

SNIP...

Originally Posted by evolveme

I want to know if we are ever seen clearly enough in the skin we're in, or if we're always bleeding into our roles.

day-um!

[Arwen]

Originally Posted by blush

Totally get what you're saying...

I think I'm being a tad more specific and asking is it possible for our masculine counterparts to describe us adequately without referencing the role we hold in their life.

I have to say that since I am fortunate enough to know that fella you are partnered with...I think he could do it.

No. I know he can do it. He's a passionate thinker. It may take him a bit to get his thoughts in a order that is pleasing to him, but once he does...it will blow you out of the water.

Grin, but you already know that about him.

Originally Posted by hippieflowergirl

spoken language is so damn limiting, isn't it? i find myself flailing for ways to adequately express the damn chaos in my damn mind. dammit.

i just finished rereading one of my fave science fiction books (octavia butler) about a species (wholly peaceful, thank the stars) that could link in to the nervous system of others and understand every damn thing without having to say a damn word. i don't know if i'd love it or hate it but i damn sure wouldn't mind trying it for a day.

(any guesses about my word of the day?)

Chaos? hee. I have heard of octavia Butler but have not read her yet. I think I could describe another person without mentioning their roles in my life but I'm not sure.

I thought about doing this for my mama--and failed. Everything for me came back to the role she was in my life.

A harder task, I think, than I initially thought. I'm going to keep working on it for my own peace of mind.

Is it easier to describe someone not in our lives so intimately? Of course it is. I hope some of us are up to this task. An intriguing exercise to see how ... and who we are.

[Lynn]

Originally Posted by Arwen

I thought about doing this for my mama--and failed. Everything for me came back to the role she was in my life.

A harder task, I think, than I initially thought. I'm going to keep working on it for my own peace of mind.

Is it easier to describe someone not in our lives so intimately? Of course it is. I hope some of us are up to this task. An intriguing exercise to see how ... and who we are.

I remember one of the most depressing moments of my life--when, exhausted from waking up every two hours for months to nurse my daughter, I had the "realization" that my only purpose on earth was to feed this child. I had the thought that if I were to die, I would only be missed for that. It was a very lonely, degrading thought to me. I could not see a reason for being, as an individual, at that moment.

As difficult as it is to describe someone--who they are and not their "roles," I think it's just as hard to describe ourselves. At least, it is for me. I take on the mantle of these roles and identies, but soon forget the *I* that chose them. I become them. Who could blame anyone else, then, for trying to see me *as* them?

[Arwen]

Originally Posted by Lynn

As difficult as it is to describe someone--who they are and not their "roles," I think it's just as hard to describe ourselves. At least, it is for me. I take on the mantle of these roles and identies, but soon forget the *I* that chose them. I become them. Who could blame anyone else, then, for trying to see me *as* them?

I think maybe you've just hit on a very important point. Because we ourselves accept those roles, we don't push our own envelopes. We don't become all we can be (sorry for the motto, lol).

Maybe by remaining "just" partners or wives or girlfriends or however we style that relationship...maybe we keep ourselves down.

I am not saying we all do this, but I think there is a percentage that do. And it's probably easier, right? Tell them you are a _____ and let them relate to you on that level and that level only. Keeps intimacy controllable. Manageable. Not so scary.

Do we as femmes perpetuate the role of femme? The giggles and flirting and all the rest?

[Lynn]

Arwen,

I was thinking about your attempt to see your mother as someone beyond her roles and I wondered if she was able to see herself as someone beyond her roles.

I think we typically present ourselves in a certain way (wife, mother, etc) because that's how we think of ourselves. We, in this thread and on this site, might be unique to the degree that we are willing to self-examine. I work with women who are sick or dying, and I am stunned by the willingness of so many to reach this place with no sense of self.

[KayCee]

I think it's not the way we are seen by others, rather than the way we see ourselves and how we let them treat us, that matters.