Reclaiming Lesbian Pride

[ScandalAndy]

Originally Posted by CherylNYC

You get to ID however you choose and however you define it. We all do. Do you really need me or anyone else to give you permission? I hope you're being sarcastic.

The classic definition of lesbian is a woman/female who partners romantically and sexually with women/females. As usual, not everyone agrees, of course. If you need to give yourself permission, ask yourself where you fit into that definition.

My question wasn't even close to sarcastic and that's the sad part.

I took a whole bunch of crap for how I choose the words I use to define myself. To some people, according to their definitions, I don't have any right to be here. So what do we do? Do we look at each other across the table? Do we pretend the other isn't there? To some people, according to their definitions, I'm just as much a lesbian as anyone else here.

I don't fit the classic definition of a woman/female who partners romantically and sexually with women/females 100% of the time. So what does that mean for how welcome I am in the community and how much weight my thoughts and opinions are given?

Am I, as Heart has so graciously pointed out, "appropriating or co-opting an identity?"

No, I am not a white woman claiming to be a POC, but I am a queer who is claiming to be a lesbian. Now that we've got the example that has been tossed around in conversation standing right in front of us, how are we going to handle it?



These are really open ended questions and I am not expecting you or anyone to have concrete answers to them, it's just something to think about.

[Heart]

Originally Posted by ScandalAndy

Am I, as Heart has so graciously pointed out, "appropriating or co-opting an identity?"

Good grief - I didn't say you were doing that, I said it was a valid question that one might ask oneself, meaning over the course of their life journey. Identities aren't fixed, they do evolve. I still don't get why you are personalizing this. Cheryl offered a "classic" or mainstream definition, I didn't see her suggest that you aren't allowed to id as a lesbian.

I also edited my last post for clarity in terms of what I feel is important in this discussion and I mentioned that I know dykes who sleep with men. But how we each arrive at our own personal labels and who agrees with our labels and who doesn't, is actually not what's important to me in this discussion.

But maybe I'm talking to myself. It's been known to happen.

Heart

[ScandalAndy]

Originally Posted by Heart

Good grief - I didn't say you were doing that, I said it was a valid question that one might ask oneself, meaning over the course of their life journey. Identities aren't fixed, they do evolve. I still don't get why you are personalizing this. Cheryl offered a "classic" or mainstream definition, I didn't see her suggest that you aren't allowed to id as a lesbian.

I also edited my last post for clarity in terms of what I feel is important in this discussion and I mentioned that I know dykes who sleep with men. But how we each arrive at our own personal labels and who agrees with our labels and who doesn't, is actually not what's important to me in this discussion.

But maybe I'm talking to myself. It's been known to happen.

Heart

My question wasn't "can I ID this way", my question is "if I choose to ID this way, will it be accepted".

I took your suggestion that one could ask oneself that question, and applied it to myself. Am i co-opting or appropriating the identity? I don't believe I am, but how do I know for sure since I don't adhere to the classical definition?


Is my adherence to that definition of lesbian necessary for inclusion in this thread? Now we are stuck with the exact sticky situation of language that we've all been dancing around.

If the answer is yes, then that is perfectly fine with me. I will politely relinquish that right in this thread only, and be a very supportive ally on the sidelines. Just because this isn't my space doesn't mean I won't be supportive.

If the answer is no, then I am happy to know that, as a community, our definition of lesbian is flexible enough for me to participate. I will be a supportive and active participant.


These are open questions, I am not directing them solely at you.

[Heart]

[QUOTE=ScandalAndy;409393]My question wasn't "can I ID this way", my question is "if I choose to ID this way, will it be accepted".

Accepted where? In this thread? By other individuals? By a lesbian separatist community? What's your standard for "acceptance?" I am sure there are those who agree with and accept your definition and those who don't. So what? There are people that don't accept me as a Jew because I'm not observant. There are people that don't accept me as a lesbian because I was married to a man for a decade. There are people that don't accept me because they don't like me. None of that is really my business and I can't possibly establish my sense of self based upon others' decisions to accept me or not. I go where its warm.

I took your suggestion that one could ask oneself that question, and applied it to myself. Am i co-opting or appropriating the identity? I don't believe I am, but how do I know for sure since I don't adhere to the classical definition?

I don't adhere to the classical definition of a lesbian either, or a Jew, for that matter, yet I am both.

Is my adherence to that definition of lesbian necessary for inclusion in this thread? Now we are stuck with the exact sticky situation of language that we've all been dancing around.

Obviously the answer to this question is "no," since you are here in this thread. And so am I. What are we dancing around? -- it does feel like you're trying to set some kind of trap by accusing others in this thread that they are excluding you. Or are you really looking for reassurance that you are accepted?

If the answer is yes, then that is perfectly fine with me. I will politely relinquish that right in this thread only, and be a very supportive ally on the sidelines. Just because this isn't my space doesn't mean I won't be supportive.

That's nice and I completely agree that being an ally is important.

If the answer is no, then I am happy to know that, as a community, our definition of lesbian is flexible enough for me to participate. I will be a supportive and active participant.

That's nice too.

I still am not getting who it is you think should be answering your question about whether you are accepted here or not. Personally, I accept you as a lesbian and welcome your inclusion in this discussion.

I'd rather get back though to talking about the relative benefits, obstacles, and challenges in gender vs feminist theory as it relates to multiple identities in the context of patriarchy. I admit that the topic of lesbian pride per se is sorta narrow for me.

[CherylNYC]

Originally Posted by ScandalAndy

My question wasn't even close to sarcastic and that's the sad part.

I took a whole bunch of crap for how I choose the words I use to define myself. To some people, according to their definitions, I don't have any right to be here. So what do we do? Do we look at each other across the table? Do we pretend the other isn't there? To some people, according to their definitions, I'm just as much a lesbian as anyone else here.

I don't fit the classic definition of a woman/female who partners romantically and sexually with women/females 100% of the time. So what does that mean for how welcome I am in the community and how much weight my thoughts and opinions are given?

Am I, as Heart has so graciously pointed out, "appropriating or co-opting an identity?"

No, I am not a white woman claiming to be a POC, but I am a queer who is claiming to be a lesbian. Now that we've got the example that has been tossed around in conversation standing right in front of us, how are we going to handle it?



These are really open ended questions and I am not expecting you or anyone to have concrete answers to them, it's just something to think about.

OK, you want permission to be here. Who, exactly do you think is going to grant or rescind that permission? Last I checked, we're all humans of equal rank sitting at computers, typing words. Are you taking a poll? If there are 50 participants how many of them have to welcome you here? 30 out of 50? 45? Do you need all 50 to welcome you into the lesbian sisterhood? Is that how you want us to "handle it"? While I sometimes think it might make negotiating this site a bit easier, we haven't elected an Amazon Queen or King who gets to make these decisions in the absence of a democratic vote, so you'll get none of the above.

Am I cranky? Why, yes I am. Why? Because the topic of the thread is Lesbian Pride. The OP stated from the start that she hoped the thread wouldn't get mired in endless discussions about terms and definitions. We've also already spent quite a bit of energy on trans inclusion. Many of us, including you, agree that we would like to refocus on lesbian pride. At which point you wrote yet another post about terms and definitions based on trans inclusion and identity.

"These are really open ended questions and I am not expecting you or anyone to have concrete answers to them, it's just something to think about."

If you aren't really looking for an answer, why do you continue to drag the conversation towards definitions and trans issues?

[ScandalAndy]

Originally Posted by CherylNYC

OK, you want permission to be here. Who, exactly do you think is going to grant or rescind that permission? Last I checked, we're all humans of equal rank sitting at computers, typing words. Are you taking a poll? If there are 50 participants how many of them have to welcome you here? 30 out of 50? 45? Do you need all 50 to welcome you into the lesbian sisterhood? Is that how you want us to "handle it"? While I sometimes think it might make negotiating this site a bit easier, we haven't elected an Amazon Queen or King who gets to make these decisions in the absence of a democratic vote, so you'll get none of the above.

Am I cranky? Why, yes I am. Why? Because the topic of the thread is Lesbian Pride. The OP stated from the start that she hoped the thread wouldn't get mired in endless discussions about terms and definitions. We've also already spent quite a bit of energy on trans inclusion. Many of us, including you, agree that we would like to refocus on lesbian pride. At which point you wrote yet another post about terms and definitions based on trans inclusion and identity.

"These are really open ended questions and I am not expecting you or anyone to have concrete answers to them, it's just something to think about."

If you aren't really looking for an answer, why do you continue to drag the conversation towards definitions and trans issues?

I wrote a post about terms and definitions in relation to a lesbian: me, not a post about trans inclusion, actually. I wrote a post based on my own life. My own experiences. The reality of what someone who IDs as a lesbian might look like, and the questions that I am asking myself and maybe others are asking themselves, or should be. I didn't come here to be patronized by anyone.

It isn't so very easy to take these things we've been talking about and apply them to a real, flesh and blood human being, and then stand behind our convictions. I put myself on the chopping block to see what we all would do when this becomes reality instead of a discussion about words. I want to be proud to be a lesbian, pure and simple. If i'm going to get judged for that, I'll go elsewhere.

I won't take 100% of the blame for the discussion of terminology here, and I won't accept your insinuation that I am dragging anything anywhere by asking the things that I am in the manner in which I presented them. I'm not asking about trans issues, i'm asking about my own life.

Respectfully, Cheryl, get off my ass. You want me to leave because you don't think I'm a dyke? I will. You want me to leave because you think I'm annoying? Too bad.

I wanted an answer to a question posed, respectfully, to a community because, let's face it: I can identify as a lesbian all I want, but if I'm the only one who accepts it, it's pretty much useless and a community of one is powerless.







Actually, I'm so frustrated with this whole thing that I concede. You're right, I constantly derail the thread with my constant carrying on about terminology, gender, and trans rights. Sorry for ruining your constructive conversation and the headway being made about the patriarchy. It won't happen again.

[Heart]

Okay, maybe this is really between Cheryl and SA and I should butt-out, but... I get suspicious when a conceptual discussion turns towards "this is my life, my truth, my experience" because it's apt to be a red herring.

That's not to dismiss your personal experiences SA, but if we want to go that route, I'm sure each and every one of us here has a story to tell. There are as many stories as there are raindrops and individually they will tell us very little. You gotta look for the patterns, the larger themes.

I'll wager that if we do that, there's a damn good chance that you and I and Cheryl and City and Jess and Chazz and Kobi and Slater and dreadgeek, etc would find enough commonalities that we would be able to stand with each other in solidarity as queers, as women, as lesbians, as gender transgressors, as feminists, as concerned citizens, as warriors. Would we each call ourselves a lesbian? I don't know. Would we each define the other as a lesbian? As long as you're standing with me, I could give a rats ass.

Again, what I'm saying is that the individual identity, including that of "lesbian," does not concern me as much as the broader issues of what happens to those of us that the patriarchal world sees as lesbians or even more broadly, as women. The heart and pride of my activist community comes from those shared concerns, not from our very individual identities, journies, and labels.

Heart