Reclaiming Lesbian Pride

[CherylNYC]

Originally Posted by Martina

It does not. Of course. Defending or reclaiming one might be taking a position against another. It often is the case. i have given examples.

Let's look at this quote -- from Kobi, whom i did not mean to offend by not using her name.



Who MIGHT be making her feel like a guest in her OWN community? Perhaps someone NOT a "woman who wants to be with other women?" i am guessing. The possibilities of people who choose to ID as lesbian but are not women loving women are somewhat limited. i speculated.

There's a ton of research on identity formation, much of which talks about how it is created by defining oneself in opposition to the other, by disavowing another group. i think that's a normal way of thinking. But ID formation on a greater than individual level is sticky stuff. i used to be offended (as a woman) by definitions of femme that implied that a reconsidered and reconstructed femme femininity was somehow superior to that of straight women. Anyway, femme cultural products are full of such statements. Less so anymore.

My point is that ID formation can come out of disavowals of the other. It can disparage the other. Definitions that imply that straight women are less reflective of or transgressive in their femininity are examples.

But when you take it up a level to DEFENDING a supposedly beleaguered identity, you enter into a discourse that does more than potentially demean the other. The poor me stuff can lead to justifications for exclusion or worse. It's the rhetoric of oppression. The speakers may SOUND like victims, but they are justifying something else.

So i am not calling anyone here an oppressor. But this kind of discourse is dangerous. In any context.

I can't speak for Kobi, but I can say unequivocally that when I use the word 'lesbian' to identify myself I have been met with some hostility from people who, in another time and place, would have certainly been called lesbians, and probably would have called themselves lesbians. In some circles, including b-f communities, calling oneself a lesbian is considered uncool, a relic from former times, and a word associated with people who would choose to oppress those who don't fit into a narrow definition of what it means to be a woman who has sex with and partners with other women. There have been lesbians who claim I can't be one because I'm a stonefemme, because I'm a leatherwoman, and because I partner with butch women. I very powerfully, emphatically, and crankily claim the label LESBIAN because I am one. F.U. to anyone who attempts to tell me otherwise.

There have been plenty of straight POCs who attempt to police the behaviours of LGBT POCs. Some have claimed that gayness is a white disease. Does that make LGBT POCs disavow their connection to their communities? Not usually, and yet that's a common response amongst those who might once have called themselves lesbians. Because some lesbians have attempted to police their (b-f, trans, leather), IDs, they eschew the use of the label. Some of the not-very-bright people who have challenged my lesbian ID have done so because they assume it must mean I'm a transphobe.

The reason I'm hammering this point with you Martina, is that there is not one place in my general definition or in my self ID that has anything to do with males or transphobia. You brought that accusation into the thread spuriously, and you have yet to support the accusation with any quote. You merely assert that feeling defended around the use of this, in my opinion, embattled ID, must have something to do with transphobia. This is inflammatory because in my experience, unsupported accusations of transphobia are sometimes used to shut down conversations about lesbian ID.

I'm a prickly, argumentative person when I get riled up. Attempts to shut me down don't work very well, but others who are not as verbally aggressive as I am will walk away from those conversations where their lesbian ID has been mocked or denigrated feeling disempowered and invalidated. This is the reason why 'Lesbian Pride' is a topic of importance to me. Unless one is foolish enough to personally challenge my ID, there's nothing "dangerous" about this discourse.

[Martina]

Originally Posted by CherylNYC

This is inflammatory because in my experience, unsupported accusations of transphobia are sometimes used to shut down conversations about lesbian ID.

i have seen that too. Or about any issue around women. It was not my intent to shut down discussion of lesbian identity or to divert it to a discussion of transphobia. i probably could have made all my points without saying that. i am sure it is part of the mix of motivations for some folks who use this rhetoric because it is explicitly said. Not here. i agree with you.

i am not saying that there aren't many other reasons to experience lesbian ID as challenged. i hate defending myself, but on the dash site, i spent a lot of time and energy trying to end the lesbian bashing that was tolerated for so long there.

In any case, i agree with the moderators that parsing this out is probably the work of another thread.

Re the assumption of lesbian = woman loving woman, i gotta say that on this site, that IS excluding folk. i guess we know that.

[BullDog]

I do agree that the focus of lesbian threads should be on women. However within the context of our community there are also a significant number of lesbians partnered with males/male identified people. I think lesbian needs to be discussed and understood within this broader context. They are women, so the focus is still on women. Also many males/male identified persons do have ties to the lesbian community. It is part of their herstory/history.

[Jess]

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by Martina

i have seen that too. Or about any issue around women. It was not my intent to shut down discussion of lesbian identity or to divert it to a discussion of transphobia. i probably could have made all my points without saying that. i am sure it is part of the mix of motivations for some folks who use this rhetoric because it is explicitly said. Not here. i agree with you.

i am not saying that there aren't many other reasons to experience lesbian ID as challenged. i hate defending myself, but on the dash site, i spent a lot of time and energy trying to end the lesbian bashing that was tolerated for so long there.

In any case, i agree with the moderators that parsing this out is probably the work of another thread.

Re the assumption of lesbian = woman loving woman, i gotta say that on this site, that IS excluding folk. i guess we know that.

So, if lesbian does not mean 'woman loving woman' then what does lesbian mean? Does lesbian include an FTM who loves women? Does it include a cisgendered male who loves women? If the term includes the former then why does the term not include the latter? Does it include a cross-dressing man who 'feels like a woman' when convenient but keeps his heterosexual male identity for career purposes? Does it include a homophobic cisgendered heterosexual man who says "I'm a lesbian, we both love women, yuk yuk"? If not, why does it include the FTM but not any of the cisgendered men?

I fear that this construction points us toward "well, if I like what you stand for then your identity is what you say it is but if I don't like what you stand for then your identity isn't what you say it is". It might just be me but I think that kind of stance lives in the same ethical neighborhood as plain old-fashions, down-home bigotry.

Cheers
Aj

[Reader]

SNIP

Originally Posted by CherylNYC

I can't speak for Kobi, but I can say unequivocally that when I use the word 'lesbian' to identify myself I have been met with some hostility from people who, in another time and place, would have certainly been called lesbians, and probably would have called themselves lesbians. In some circles, including b-f communities, calling oneself a lesbian is considered uncool, a relic from former times...

SNIP

I could not help but recall the term "Lavender Menace" after reading this.