Reclaiming Lesbian Pride

[Heart]

And there you have it. "Behavior and role appropriate for one's sex" reeks of patriarchal assumptions.

And as far as body dysmorphia: again, it's impossible to be female in a patriarchal culture and not have body dysmorphia, considering the objectification and violence routinely done to women's bodies.

Odd, how gender-studies terminology has managed to side-step the historical realities of living as a woman (whether born that way or not), in favor of a very narrow focus on trans vs non-trans. I get awfully tired of the rareified Ivory Tower approach to gender and "North American gender politics," as HB so aptly put it.

Women transgress rigid and limited gender definitions all the time in order to survive. I'm not talking just about queers, I'm talking globally, about women. Read the book in my sig line. As for young activists -- the book in my sig line should be required reading.

Heart

[ScandalAndy]

But Heart, I'm not using it with any consideration of behaviors and roles that are appropriate for one's sex. I don't give a damn what anyone else thinks is "appropriate". So what does that make me?

I think it is quite a broad statement you've made regarding dysphoria. Do you not agree that all women, butch/andro/femme/whatever have objectification and violence practiced upon them in some form or another under patriarchal values?

Now, imagine the added burden of feeling the physical body you are contained within does not represent the gender of your mind and thought patterns. Gender dysphoria is a struggle that is added to the experience of trans men and women. Trans women then take on the burden of objectification of and violence against women. Trans men struggle with the scars of that burden and how to address it throughout their transition.

I don't think gender studies is side stepping the reality of living as a woman. It is very much stressed that there is still a deep inequality there. However, that is being taught alongside the assertion that there are multiple gender presentations and identities that deserve to be recognized and supported just as much. This is not a trans. vs. non-trans thing, here. Please do not mistake me as someone who is supportive of a binary system. Cissexual and cisgender ARE being used interchangeably because you can identify with your sex, or you can not, or you can sometimes identify with it. The roles you identify with, the behaviors, the way you dress, walk, act, and talk? Those can change in a heartbeat and are not the same for everyone.

Put me next to my friend C*, we are both femme lesbians. We both like computers, play nerdy games, have long hair, swear by black mascara, enjoy volleyball, have fantasy football teams, and change the oil in our cars. We have similar behaviors which do not clearly fit into any sort of role. We are both women who struggle against the pay difference in our field. We both have complaints about dating. The difference is that she was tormented and fired from her previous job because the name and gender on her birth certificate did not match the name on her resume.

She needs language to describe and validate that struggle, which I have never had to go through. It is not fair for us to deny her that language and invalidate her experience either.

Since I am using cisgender and cissexual interchangeably, I would go so far as to state that butch lesbians could be cis or trans gendered, it is the behaviors they choose for themselves, wardrobe, and introspection that dictate the butch identifier. Only the individual has the right to choose their label, anyone else trying to label is just overstepping their bounds. I do not intend to overstep my bounds and tell someone what word they should use to describe how they identify with their sex. I just attempted to put forth an example of how someone who does not share the same issues with the terminology could use them to describe themselves.

I respect that there are some butches and femmes who vehemently disagree with me. Thank you for your disagreement, you are entitled to your opinion and beliefs. We are all correct.

You are correct, women transgress gender restrictions all the time, whether it be out of necessity or inclination. I am happy to applaud my sisters who challenge everything we know about gender and it's so-called boundaries. Without brave women throughout history, we wouldn't have the redefined view of what it means to be a woman today.

Originally Posted by Heart

And there you have it. "Behavior and role appropriate for one's sex" reeks of patriarchal assumptions.

And as far as body dysmorphia: again, it's impossible to be female in a patriarchal culture and not have body dysmorphia, considering the objectification and violence routinely done to women's bodies.

Odd, how gender-studies terminology has managed to side-step the historical realities of living as a woman (whether born that way or not), in favor of a very narrow focus on trans vs non-trans. I get awfully tired of the rareified Ivory Tower approach to gender and "North American gender politics," as HB so aptly put it.

Women transgress rigid and limited gender definitions all the time in order to survive. I'm not talking just about queers, I'm talking globally, about women. Read the book in my sig line. As for young activists -- the book in my sig line should be required reading.

Heart

[imperfect_cupcake]

Put me next to my friend C*, we are both femme lesbians. We both like computers, play nerdy games, have long hair, swear by black mascara, enjoy volleyball, have fantasy football teams, and change the oil in our cars. We have similar behaviors which do not clearly fit into any sort of role. We are both women who struggle against the pay difference in our field. We both have complaints about dating. The difference is that she was tormented and fired from her previous job because the name and gender on her birth certificate did not match the name on her resume.

She needs language to describe and validate that struggle, which I have never had to go through. It is not fair for us to deny her that language and invalidate her experience either.

I see your point. I think where my brain was at was the use of trans or cis as applied by others, to others. Cause I've seen a heap of that, especially online. it's a very casual use of a descriptor. I've done it online, though I do make an effort to avoid it as much as possible. If someone self identifies, fab. But just like the "just me's" who ask what the name is for those who don't ID as butch or femme, because having a dichotamy infers only two choices - what is there for those who don't feel cissticks properly? Sometimes I am, sometimes I'm not. I personally don't think I'd fit into that - femme fits me because for me, it is it's own gender - therefore I can do anything with it and I don't need anything else.

I wouldn't want to remove terms from those who have a home in them. I'm quite attached to mine, so I know the feeling.

I guess I don't really have certain kinds of conversations any more in my flesh life, even though I hang out with mostly genderqueer people of various different shades than I ever did on the west coast. I wonder why that is. I never ask people how they define any more, I honestly don't care. However if they want to talk to me about it, I'm perfectly happy listening. I'm happy talking about all kinds of ID they have in regards to sexuality (pan, bi, lezz, heteroflexible wotever...) or gender, but I only really debate it much when I come *here* to this sight. Not that it's a bad thing, but slowly, it's getting more and more foreign, I think.

I dunno perhaps my brain just stalled about five years ago and the damp has set in.

[ScandalAndy]

Originally Posted by honeybarbara

I see your point. I think where my brain was at was the use of trans or cis as applied by others, to others. Cause I've seen a heap of that, especially online. it's a very casual use of a descriptor. I've done it online, though I do make an effort to avoid it as much as possible. If someone self identifies, fab. But just like the "just me's" who ask what the name is for those who don't ID as butch or femme, because having a dichotamy infers only two choices - what is there for those who don't feel cissticks properly? Sometimes I am, sometimes I'm not. I personally don't think I'd fit into that - femme fits me because for me, it is it's own gender - therefore I can do anything with it and I don't need anything else.

I wouldn't want to remove terms from those who have a home in them. I'm quite attached to mine, so I know the feeling.

I guess I don't really have certain kinds of conversations any more in my flesh life, even though I hang out with mostly genderqueer people of various different shades than I ever did on the west coast. I wonder why that is. I never ask people how they define any more, I honestly don't care. However if they want to talk to me about it, I'm perfectly happy listening. I'm happy talking about all kinds of ID they have in regards to sexuality (pan, bi, lezz, heteroflexible wotever...) or gender, but I only really debate it much when I come *here* to this sight. Not that it's a bad thing, but slowly, it's getting more and more foreign, I think.

I dunno perhaps my brain just stalled about five years ago and the damp has set in.

You know, that's a good question. Why don't we have these conversations anymore? Is there a shift in what is considered important? Am I overlooking something? Have you evolved past wanting to pick apart these things? Is it okay that I am still knee deep in wanting to know why and how and throw myself into all the experiences I can because I want to know how it feels and how I can help? Will I some day be able to leave this crazy turmoil of having to defend my opinion?

I don't know the answers to these questions, and I thank you for inspiring me to take a closer look. Maybe I am getting too bogged down and failing to see the forest for the trees.

[DapperButch]

Not that I actually know the history, but.....

I think it rolled just like it did with the terms transgender and transsexual.

People mean transsexual when they say transgender.

People mean cissexed when they say cisgender.

The difference is we have accepted that when someone says transgender they actually mean transsexual. When it comes to cissexed/cisgender, some people are still wanting to hold onto the actual definitions of the terms (and good for them!)

Personally, it still annoys the fuck out of me that people use the terms transsexual and transgender interchangeably. But, that's just me.

ETA: What I meant by the above. I think what has happened here in the past is that people have used the term cisgender when what they meant was cissexed. Folks who don't know what the term (cisgender) means looks it up. The reader becomes frustrated because what they read is that the term cisgender means a person who fits society's gender expectations in looks and behaviors. They cry foul b/c that doesn't fit for many here. As well they should. The speaker was referring to people who don't have gender dysphoria (cissexed). If the speaker had used the correct term to begin with (cissexed), all would be well.

Just my opinion as to what I have seen.

[Slater]

Originally Posted by ScandalAndy

You know, that's a good question. Why don't we have these conversations anymore? Is there a shift in what is considered important? Am I overlooking something? Have you evolved past wanting to pick apart these things? Is it okay that I am still knee deep in wanting to know why and how and throw myself into all the experiences I can because I want to know how it feels and how I can help? Will I some day be able to leave this crazy turmoil of having to defend my opinion?

I don't know the answers to these questions, and I thank you for inspiring me to take a closer look. Maybe I am getting too bogged down and failing to see the forest for the trees.

There's a bunch of interesting tangents going on in this thread. I'm going to try to tackle them one(ish) and time.

Perhaps the conversations aren't happening as much anymore because it feels like the terrain has gotten too complicated, the language so diverse and usage so idiosyncratic that it becomes difficult to even have a conversation that gets much beyond "This is what I mean by that term, what do you mean by it?" "I don't use that term anymore, I use this other one." So although these conversations are still possible, I think it's more challenging.

There may also be an element of been-there-done-that for some people. I'm a total wonk for this kind of stuff though, so I'm content to go there and do that again and again.

I do think there is still desire to have these conversations, as evidenced by the popularity of events like the Femme Con and the Butch Voices Conference. I just would like to see an organization that does not focus so much on a big once-a-year thing that winds up reaching only a tiny fraction of the community. I'm hoping Butch Nation will do things differently, and Jeanne Cordova indicated to me that she was going to take my butch org wish list to the BN planning committee, but given that they have already annouced a big national conference for next year, I'm inclined to think that it will be more of what we already have.


And ScandalAndy, maybe don't think of it as defending your opinion, so much as explaining it. All you have to do is try to be thorough in your thought processes, clear in your explanations, and be open to hearing other perspectives and rethinking things if need be. Now, if you are in a discussion with someone who is not entering it with similar intentions, then a different strategy might be called for. But even that would be about protecting yourself rather than defending your opinions, per se.

Honeybarbara, I totally know what you mean about feeling like the brain has been in mothballs for awhile. A couple months ago, I was looking through old threads on "dash" and I found myself thinking, among other things, "Cripes, I used to be so smart. What happened?"

[lettertodaddy]

Originally Posted by ScandalAndy

You know, that's a good question. Why don't we have these conversations anymore?

I've tried. Most of the queer folks I know (1) don't really ID with the queer community as a whole, or (2) seem to have moved past it. But then again, I don't really have a queer circle of friends here, and the last time we had a discussion about it, we were all three sheets to the wind and it was about 3 am.

I tried bringing it up with my ex, but conversations like this bored her. She knew who she was, was happy with it, end of story. She wasn't interested in theory (and she also thought she wasn't smart enough to talk about it in detail) -- she, to quote her, was "just living (her) life the only way (she) knew how."

I miss discussions like this.

[Slater]

Cissexual is an adjective used in the context of gender issues to describe "people who are not transsexual and who have only ever experienced their mental and physical sexes as being aligned".[1] Nikki Sullivan and Samantha Murray characterized the term as "a way of drawing attention to the unmarked norm, against which trans* is identified, in which a person feels that their gender identity matches their body/sex".[2]

Cisgender ( /ˈsɪsdʒɛndər/) (or cisgendered) is an adjective used in the context of gender issues and counselling to refer to a class of gender identities formed by a match between an individual's gender identity and the behavior or role considered appropriate for one's sex.[1]

Before we break out the stone tablets and enshrine what Wikipedia offers up as the definitions, let's acknowledge that these are not "official" definitions and may or may not reflect actual usage all that well.

But what I am really interested in is, if possible, stepping back from these words as identities and trying to nail down exactly what work we want this language to accomplish and then seeing how close or far it is from accomplishing that. Because I think this language was essentially rushed out into common and academic usage while it was still in the beta-testing stage and not all of the bugs had been worked out yet. Basically, it's a linguistic Windows Vista.

I realized though that this thread is probably not the place for that, so I'll poke around in the other forums looking for a suitable home.

[Chazz]

Originally Posted by Heart

And there you have it. "Behavior and role appropriate for one's sex" reeks of patriarchal assumptions.

And as far as body dysmorphia: again, it's impossible to be female in a patriarchal culture and not have body dysmorphia, considering the objectification and violence routinely done to women's bodies.

Odd, how gender-studies terminology has managed to side-step the historical realities of living as a woman (whether born that way or not), in favor of a very narrow focus on trans vs non-trans. I get awfully tired of the rareified Ivory Tower approach to gender and "North American gender politics," as HB so aptly put it.

Women transgress rigid and limited gender definitions all the time in order to survive. I'm not talking just about queers, I'm talking globally, about women. Read the book in my sig line. As for young activists -- the book in my sig line should be required reading.

Heart

"What is required for the hegemony of heteronormative [patriarchal] standards to maintain power is our continual repetition of such gender acts in the most mundane of daily activities (the way we walk, talk, gesticulate, etc.).... That style [of gender performance] has no relation to essential "truths" about the body but is strictly ideological. It has a history that exists beyond the subject who enacts those conventions...." Dino Felluga