Men with boobs.

[BullDog]

It certainly is a hurtful comment for me to see (even if wasn't said about me personally), but I do wish the couple and their family well.

[Cyclopea]

They are a cute couple, aint they?

[BullDog]

Originally Posted by Cyclopea

They are a cute couple, aint they?

Yep, gotta love the redheads!

[WILDCAT]

... not to throw a monkey wrench into this very "lovely" conversation...

BUT, I was out tonight at my local VETS CLUB and Jeopardy was on - and someone commented on the one "GUY" on the show for having man boobs...



So, what does THAT have to do with "anything"?!! Hmmmm...
__

To me, the argument that goes on and on and on here, is so very SAD.

And depending on a multitude of factors, leads us to discourse and then of COURSE, against each other........... and CLEARLY there are ally forces in tact... We'd be fucking liars to admit that is NOT TRUE!

Regardless, we go through the same ROMP over and over. And we DO wonder sometimes why we call ourselves "community", when clearly we are not even close to being kind and/or accepting to/with each other.

It DOES remind me of the years when the gay men and gay women could NOT get along - and for it was the tragic event of AIDS that brought us all close together (as did the transgendered community).

And someone mentioned, if WE cannot get along here how can anyone else respect us, for our differences. OR/and... if we cannot accept what folks say publicly about us, and even FROM OUR OWN COMMUNITY (and there is no such thing as "perfection", it's LIVE AND LEARN BABY!), THEN YES, we are going to have to get set back YEARS for this lack of understanding when someone words things a certain way. Does it negate the "new generation" though?

Hell no! Actually, FUCK NO.

It is NOT about that. Can folks just respect that someone like Heart is standing up for OUR rights and NOT take it fucking personal? She has already said... "FINE HOWEVER, WHATEVER anyone wants to ID as..." But, really, many ARE missing the point... SOMEONE LIKE ME, LIKE IT OR NOT... as a proud lesbian BUTCH is getting the shaft. WHY take that personal if it does NOT belong to you? I don't understand that.

It seems like BOTH "SIDES" (which really SHOULD there should BE SIDES??!!) are taking things personal and being defensive, AND........... most importantly - NOT SUPPORTING EACH OTHER AS PART OF A COMMUNITY!!

You know, I am starting to wonder, IS THERE A COMMMUNITY HERE?

Gracias,
WILDCAT

[PapaC]

Originally Posted by WILDCAT

You know, I am starting to wonder, IS THERE A COMMMUNITY HERE?

Gracias,
WILDCAT

Of course there is, Wildcat. and with every community comes disagreements. I love the passion I see here (on all 'sides' if you will).

My thoughts get scrambled around all of this. So I can only go at this from a 'me' perspective/observations.

Language and construction of language is challenge even for those of us participating in some form of a queer community.. be it online or real time.

I think of the phrase as an unfortunate sound bite, in a sea of consistent, persistent sound bite(s) that attempt to 'explain' the appearance of a masculine woman. In this case, until Christine specifies anything else, I will see her/respect her as a woman.

There's a lot of erasing of butch women in masse media. Would anyone like to dispute this?

For example, when has there ever been a commercial for female hygiene that included a masculine-appearing woman? Or ANY commercial where there's a masculine woman?

There was an ad that ran in Canada for AutoTrader about 4 years ago. I encourage the curious to click through and read some of the comments.


here, I'll help:

"Lesbian? That was just a normal Canadian guy." (that response got 2 thumbs up )

"Best Canadian Commercial Ever! This is funny, it kinda looks like my Aunt!!! (She isn't a lesbian though" (nice assumption that she's a lesbian.not... is it because masculine women ONLY exist in the lesbian community? (as a former married woman, living as a straight woman, I find that equally erasing)

Face it, many people reduce and form their opinions/assumptions on sound bites and clips and see nothing else.

Some uninformed, unsophisticated folks who have some understanding of my transition assumed I had 'a dick sewn on'. Why? "Well, all you gotta do is just look at him." So in this guy's mind.... there was NO WAY I could *possibly* be as masculine looking as I was (post-hormones) without that god almighty dick. ... I'm not sure if it's a polar opposite to this or analogous but let me know.

I'm curious, and maybe some Oprah fans can jump in. But in the past year she's interviewed a couple of transmen, including Thomas who gave birth. There's been discussions and interviews with other transgendered folks, intersexed folks, etc. I *am* pleased to see our stories coming up more and more. Chaz is now in that category.

But, when was there ever an interview with a woman on Oprah where self identified butch woman had a change to discuss her story as a butch Woman with a capital W?

Finally, I want to end on this very chilling point. A factual observation that can't be denied:

Most of us are aware of about three main butch/femme related sites, and a lot of us have participated in at least two of those sites if not all three. On one site, I made the observation about a year ago that the keywords used as part of the description for the site did not include "butch woman" or "butch women" anywhere. It remains that way *to this day*.

Of the three, which one lists "Butch Women", "Lesbian Women", "Gay Women", "Femme Women" etc.. ?

You know the answer: ButchFemmePlanet.com ; in fact, in the keywords alone, "woman" or "women" is mentioned 10 times.

The other two sites I'm thinking about: not a single "woman" reference ANYwhere in the keywords.

That fact alone, in my humble opinion is equally disconcerting as Cynthia's comments about her partner, if not moreso, because I do believe as self-appointed leaders, activists, allies, etc... I do expect much more care and awareness in this matter.

Oh, and lastly? Of the two that DON'T specify "women" in the keywords, on one of those sites "male" is mentioned twice (granted, in the context of 'Female to Male' and 'Male to Female')

If anyone is curious and would like more information or would learn how to spot this, let me know. I know this techno-geeky stuff can be a bit ... daunting to some. I am personally a stickler for this information because I know that keywords and descriptions are perpetuated across the internet via search engines and blogs and what not. A lot of the time, search engines and directories is how we find each other. (Bulldog, Linus, back me up! LOL)

It might look like I'm nit picking. You bet I am. I am because I hate seeing my past, and my friends, and my allies consistently erased or misunderstood and/or under represented especially within our own back yard.

K, I'm outta steam.

Thank you again, Heart for opening this discussion.

[Toughy]

Originally Posted by Heart

Here's how its sexist: it implies that a woman can't be masculine, that to be masculine you can only be described as a man. It implies that women can only be feminine. That's a sexist viewpoint in that it limits the definition of woman.

Here's how its homophobic: it implies that a gay woman is really a man wanna-be, a man with boobs, rather than what she is - a lesbian, dyke, queer, butch woman. That's a homophobic viewpoint in that it denigrates queer female identities

Here's how its misogynistic: it puts the value/emphasis on male (masculine equals man/male) and devalues the femaleness inherent in the identity. That's a misogynistic viewpoint in that it devalues femaleness and privileges maleness,

Voila!

This is worth repeating. I am a little surprized at many of the responses.........but I guess I shouldn't be.......after all butch=man.

I do appreciate that on this website butch includes women as far as the founders believe.....not found (as Chris pointed out) on the other two sites. And apparently lots of folks still don't see how harmful the language of 'short man with boobs' is in defining what woman means.

Thanks Heart.........as always you speak up about how the definition of woman needs to be more inclusive.

[BullDog]

Chris, my fellow geek, you know I will always back you up! Yes, I compared the meta keywords for BFP and another butch femme site. Butch woman and femme woman are listed for BFP, not the other site. The other site does list masculine identified butches as one of their keywords, no other qualifiers for butch.

Keywords are how people find things on the internet, so yes it makes a big difference. It also makes a big difference to me to see the effort of inclusiveness being put forth by the owners, Admins and moderators of this website.

One of the several things that has really irritated me about this conversation is this casting into doubt whether Christine Marinoni is a woman or not. All it takes is a 30 second Google search to find out. I notice no one was questioning whether Cynthia Nixon was a woman or not.

Anyway this what Cynthia had to say in an interview a few years ago:

"In terms of my sexual orientation, I don't really feel that I changed," she says. "I don't feel any different than I did before. I don't feel like there was some hidden part of myself that I wasn't aware of.

"I had been with men all my life and I had never met a woman I had fallen in love with before. But when I did it didn't seem so strange.

"I don't define myself. I'm just a woman in love with another woman."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...#ixzz0njPIPyhC

They're both women. They are partners. They are raising their children. One of them has a masculine appearance and wears male clothing. She's a woman.

[Medusa]

Originally Posted by BullDog

Chris, my fellow geek, you know I will always back you up! Yes, I compared the meta keywords for BFP and another butch femme site. Butch woman and femme woman are listed for BFP, not the other site. The other site does list masculine identified butches as one of their keywords, no other qualifiers for butch.

Keywords are how people find things on the internet, so yes it makes a big difference. It also makes a big difference to me to see the effort of inclusiveness being put forth by the owners, Admins and moderators of this website.

One of the several things that has really irritated me about this conversation is this casting into doubt whether Christine Marinoni is a woman or not. All it takes is a 30 second Google search to find out. I notice no one was questioning whether Cynthia Nixon was a woman or not.

Anyway this what Cynthia had to say in an interview a few years ago:

"In terms of my sexual orientation, I don't really feel that I changed," she says. "I don't feel any different than I did before. I don't feel like there was some hidden part of myself that I wasn't aware of.

"I had been with men all my life and I had never met a woman I had fallen in love with before. But when I did it didn't seem so strange.

"I don't define myself. I'm just a woman in love with another woman."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...#ixzz0njPIPyhC

They're both women. They are partners. They are raising their children. One of them has a masculine appearance and wears male clothing. She's a woman.

Im SO glad you found these quotes Bully!

This is kinda the crux of what I was arguing earlier. Self-Identity.

These quotes refer to Cynthia Nixon identifying her partner as a woman. She has also (now in the article we are discussing) identified her partner as "basically a man with boobs".

I haven't seen anything where her *partner* self-identified. (although I will totally concede that it is highly unlikely that her partner identifies herseld as a "man with boobs")

And don't get me wrong Bully, I *do* get what you are saying and love that we are all kinda teasing this thing out together.

This conversation IS important, even if we only reiterate to one another how we want to be seen and discussed within the context of this community. I think that's valuable.

[BullDog]

It's true we only hear from Cynthia Nixon- she's the celebrity. The entire fabric of Christine Marinoni's life that we see is as an out masculine lesbian/queer woman. It's not just about a personal identity label. It's how she lives her life and how she deals with everyone's reactions to her.

In many ways she has a textbook lesbian bio, lol. She discovered feminism in college, opened a lesbian bar, became a teacher and education activist and is now partnered with a woman and their two children. I want to honor and respect her path. It's very similar to mine, as a masculine appearing, out woman. That's how I travel through the world too.

[Gemme]

Originally Posted by Metropolis

Everyone's not actually...

ETA: Not that everyone should be... I was making a comparison in the severity of reaction to the hypothetical situation I put forth and the situation at hand.

I stand by what I said, the reactions to the situation of a woman (to which Cynthia refers to her partner as) being called a man, as opposed to a male being referred to as a woman, in the context of these discussions in our community aren't comparable.

Metro

After four pages of dialogue, I'll give it to you that not "everybody" is discussing it, but those that are are pretty vocal about it.

*grin*

Originally Posted by BullDog

Sassy, yeah she appears to be newly out. I don't hate the messenger just the message. And also the fact that such tired, sexist, misogynist and homophobic remarks are being defended.

To quote Heart:

The message over and over is masculine women/butch women- suck it up, laugh it off. Not so when derogatory comments are made towards other masculine gender identities in our community.

I can see better now how the comment made is hurtful. I do not, however, believe it was intentionally so.

Originally Posted by Cyclopea

If she's a man with boobs she must be able to stroll around central park shirtless enjoying the sun on her double D's without getting so much as a second glance.

She'd get a second glance, but I believe there's still a law on the books of NY that would allow that.

*thinks about dredging up FYI thread*

Originally Posted by Heart

Bingo. Yes, I care about the language/intentions/limitations/biases and assumptions that exist around female identities. And I'm pretty amazed at some of expressions of indifference, that make this just a personal matter. Would you have the same attitude if say, Chaz Bono's partner referred to him publicly as "a man with a vagina?" Would that be seen as just a personal, off-the-cuff, cute attempt at explaining the identity of a transman?

I also take the intentions of the speaker into account. The intentions don't appear to be hurtful. Clumsy, yes. Awkward, yes. Limiting, yes. Unfortunate, yes.

One thing that frustrates me and makes my head throb in these discussions of this caliber is that those explaining their viewpoint don't stick to the situation at hand. They drag up other circumstances....What ifs?....that don't apply to the exact discussion at hand.

I acknowledge that I'm not the sharpest crayon in the box but please don't veer off with a situation that hasn't occurred just to make your (general your) current point.

Heart, I'm not necessarily addressing you specifically about this. Your post here is an example.

Originally Posted by Heart

Here's how its sexist: it implies that a woman can't be masculine, that to be masculine you can only be described as a man. It implies that women can only be feminine. That's a sexist viewpoint in that it limits the definition of woman.

Here's how its homophobic: it implies that a gay woman is really a man wanna-be, a man with boobs, rather than what she is - a lesbian, dyke, queer, butch woman. That's a homophobic viewpoint in that it denigrates queer female identities

Here's how its misogynistic: it puts the value/emphasis on male (masculine equals man/male) and devalues the femaleness inherent in the identity. That's a misogynistic viewpoint in that it devalues femaleness and privileges maleness,

Voila!

I appreciate you breaking it down like this. It's much more helpful to me than creating fictional situations.

Originally Posted by Dylan

Honestly, I just don't keep up with the likes of Cynthia Nixon (or most 'celebrities' for that matter). Again, I could give a rip about how she refers to her partner.

Good for her for speaking up about marriage equality. That's more than some people do I guess.

And the reference to Anne Heche? They're both pale, pasty-white bad actresses with short hair who are equally insignificant in my life, and I don't really feel the 'impact' of their 'stardom' (used extremely loosely) as queers.

What? They're famous and went to a rally? Yippee! Who cares? Just 'cuz someone's queer doesn't mean they're an ambassador. It also doesn't mean they have some moral obligation to always say smart, informed, activisty things. Sometimes, some queers are just normal people who just live their gay lives and happen to do an interview for some gay magazine (which I also don't read, because it's just too full of ads and stories about gay men...oh, and because I'm a bad queer).

As for the girlfriend being an activist...yay! Never heard of her before today...won't remember her name tomorrow (in fact, I already don't remember her name). But we're not discussing her words anyways. I'm sure she'll get a smackdown if she ever refers to herself as a 'man with boobs'. I'm sure she'll be told how she's holding the whole (unidentified) community down.

Again, I agree 100% if we were speaking generally...but this was a comment about this person's partner that wasn't said in some angry way as an insult. If that's how they roll in their relationship...yippee again. Not my business to 'correct' them on that one. Had she said it about all butches/lesbians/whomever, I'd march right to nyc right now and pull her hair really hard and wag my big finger of shame right in her face. Same thing if someone I was actually invested in reading said it about 'all' butches/lesbians/whatnot...but to expect Cynthia Freakin' Nixon to 'represent' better? Please. We may as well take crazy Anne Heche at that point.


Dylan...wonders who wants to tell Mahhh Woman that she's personally oppressing all women by 'letting' me refer to her as Mahhh Woman (especially when I smack her ass)

Originally Posted by Dylan

You've brought this analogy up umpteen times in this thread, so I'll answer you from my ME place. But shock of all shocks, I'll bet 1/2 of Transdom would disagree with me (if they actually cared about Cynthia Nixon's commentary).

If Famous X person were on the same level in which I place Cynthia Nixon, then I would, as a transperson, not give a rat's ass about the comment either. Is Famous X person talking about his/her/per's partner in the same context as Cynthia Nixon's comment? Then I don't really give a shit.

Is he/she/per talking about all of transmen? Then I give a rip. Are we talking Cynthia Nixon or SomeoneOfSubstanceThatActuallyMatters? Because I care about the latter but not so much about the former. Need proof? No one flipped out in this thread when Superfemme discussed her Beloved's 'boobs'. And I actually care what Superfemme has to say much moreso than Cynthia Nixon.

And here's the other thing...the ONLY place I've seen this headline over and over and over is when I googled it after Heart started this thread. I haven't heard hide nor hair of this comment until this thread was started...nor WOULD I have heard about it as I just don't give a rat's ass about Cynthia Freakin' Nixon or her partner. This comment certainly wasn't slapped across any of the newspapers I saw this morning. Haven't heard about it plastered all over the radio. Haven't seen it at all on the television. It wasn't worthy enough to make it on yahoo's front page. Seriously, where is it that this headline is just being blasted over and over besides google or another search engine? What? TMZ? That show is not allowed to be played in this house.

There's REAL queer things going on in the world that actually affect me on a personal level, and NONE of them have squat to do with some 15 minutes of fame 'celebrity' who's run her course (another Anne Heche connection).

It's funny to me that we have this whole breakdown of this one little sound-bytey snippet, but why have we NEVER broken down how vapid and sexist the show is that made this woman famous? Because there's a fucking conversation worth having.


Seriously, WHO CARES How This Woman Refers To Her Partner?,
Dylan

And just to add...again, this woman has been out for a couple/few years. She's not going to have done the same research someone who's been out for a bajillion years. She's also probably (assumption) more insulated from 'average' queers given her celebrity status. I mean, it's not like she can comfortably just waltz into tons of queer space with a myriad of different queers. Again, I take seriously very little of what 'apprentice' queers have to say.

"Apprentice" queers. I like that and what you are saying here.

I feel as if all kinds of blame is being assigned here and for what?

How many times are we told "be nice to the newbies", "don't scare the newbies; they are learning", or something along those lines. Okay, maybe that's just me.

She's new in our world and yet, because her comment was made in a public way, we are in lynch mob mentality? How can we expect her, or any person who hasn't lived for a long time in our world, to say things the way we want them to be said. Again, we can't pick and choose the way our community is shown. It would be nice but is unrealistic.

I understand the comment's hurtful potential and reality. I understand that if it was twisted and spoken about other members of our community how upset THOSE members would be. I also think that raising those situations causes unnecessary distress, but hey, that's just me. I like to address things as they come, for the most part. I plan for tornadoes or earthquakes; not for the occasional hurtful comment made from someone who doesn't affect my day to day existence.

I do, however, think they are a lovely couple, I hope they make it and I hope that, as time goes by, both grow to be strong forces in our community, so that Dylan can remember their names.

[BullDog]

No one has attacked Cynthia Nixon. I agree it was an unfortunate remark. That's not the point. Heart has already explained what her point was multiple times.

Why are masculine women almost always "othered" as men? Why can't masculine women be honored and respected as women?

It's not just Cynthia Nixon's remark. This thread is a perfect illustration.

[Jett]

I have no fricken idea who Cynthia X is, it's the first time I've heard her name. I don't care, at all, either. I've never watched Sex in the City, maybe the sexism people are saying it represents is discussion worthy... but I think conversations about how butch women are portrayed and reduced to a short man with boobs is worth having.

I don't think Heart wanted to discuss at all the repercussions of what Cynthia-in-particular says on the queer community, or critique her- but rather used the comment as a kick-start to discuss how female masculinity and butch women are thought of as men, portrayed male wannabes, dogged and stereotyped due to a patriarchal society full of sexism, misogyny... homophobia. (I don't know exactly where she wanted it to go but that's what I'm getting)

She's said several times it's not about Cynthia OR how here partner ID's but for some reason that's getting ignored, derailed and buried in favor of "who cares what Cynthia Nixon said, and there's more worthy conversations to be had" basically.

It's not just about "Cynthia's" comment, it's all the comments, comments that followed it by the general public... (manlady, wonder if her mustache is red, she's a TG'd Mason Reese, not a woman, 16 yr old boy etc etc etc).... it's about the bullshit butch women get nailed with in real life... how masculine women, female masculinty is reduced essentially to a "a short man with boobs".

I don't want to be seen as a man, at this point in my life I don't even want to pass and the general misinformation's that butches want to look like, emulate or want to be men, is worthy of examining and the whys seem like a worthy conversation here in BFP, to me.

I don't care who doesn't... but obviously members of the butch femme planet who are affected by it do, that should be enough.

Heart, thanks for starting this convo, and thanks to all that have cared enough to keep it going.

Peace,
Metro

[betenoire]

Yesterday when I was posting I was getting ready for work. I actually typed with one hand and brushed my hair with the other, then typed with one hand and did up my bra with the other. So I didn't have time to expound.

Here we go.

I agree that her wordage is unfortunate. But I also think, that since she is -not- a member of the Butch+Femme community (I don't mean online, I mean from my understanding of her words that is not her ID or how she views her relationship) it's unsurprising that she didn't have a more savvy way to voice what she wanted to say. And, again, while her wordage was unfortunate it's very -very- clear that she wasn't making a sweeping generalisation about the Butch (upper case B, here) community at large.

Only very stupid people are going to read her comments and think "omg! I was so right! Butch women just want to be men!" because only very stupid people think it's appropriate/sensible/sane to paint entire groups of people with one brush like that. And those very stupid people would have thought what they thought no matter what Nixon had said - even if Nixon had given a 14 page essay on gender, those very stupid people would have been like "omg she is ugly and mannish!".

In fact - we have no way of knowing what all Nixon had to say on the subject. She could very well have said some well-thought-out and sensitive things, which were largely ignored by the Advocate (which is a shitty magazine for very stupid Queer people) in favour of printing the easypeasy pat one-liner. Are we also cross with the Advocate for so irresponsibly printing something that would cause all of this kerfuffle?

I don't believe for a second that she thinks that the only way to be appropriately female is to be feminine. I also don't believe for a second that any of the people in this thread who don't think what she said is worth all this uproar think that the only legitimate way to be female is to be feminine.

But I do have a question. If comparing a masculine female to a man is upsetting...is it also upsetting when someone refers to their (female identified) lover as "Daddy" "Sir" "My Husband" etc. I get that those words do not mean "man" to us in this community - but I also get that those are words that have been used to describe men in various positions...well, for as long as those words have existed. Should we as a community reject those words? Should we be making up new words?

I'm not trying to be a shit-disturber by asking that question. I genuinely can't wrap my head around how one thing is diminishing and the other is perfectly acceptable. We cannot have it both ways.

[BullDog]

Once again, as we repeat ourselves over and over:

Originally Posted by Heart

Dusa - it's not about the individual identity for me or about the intimate relationship. I'm not concerned with their identities or their relationship. For me, it's about the paucity of language and images, the assumption that only men/male can be masculine, and all that that implies about views of women's genders and sexualities in society, culture and communities, including queer ones. Even if Nixon's partner is not a woman, the statment is minimizing and dismissive of the reality and complexity of butch women's lives -- because her partner is certainly seen in the world as a woman. Except now she is seen as a man with boobs.

I don't hold Nixon responsible for the fact that there are such narrow visions of what women are, and so few ways to describe the lives of women that fall outside of cultural norms, but it saddens me that she has to use this kind of tired, (and yes, sexist, misogynistic, and homophobic) remark to describe her partner.

Heart

[betenoire]

Originally Posted by jaqueline

hahaha....he may wear boots also.

I am wondering why nobody (especially those who are of the "it is unacceptable to every compare a masculine woman to a man" camp) bothered to point out how uncool it is to just go about and defacto refer to every Butch (or butch) person on the planet as "he" regardless of what their own preferred pronoun is. Because -that- is one of my own pet-peeves.

Originally Posted by BullDog

Once again, as we repeat ourselves over and over:

Well then how about I repeat my question, since you clearly did not actually read my post just now.

Originally Posted by betenoire

But I do have a question. If comparing a masculine female to a man is upsetting...is it also upsetting when someone refers to their (female identified) lover as "Daddy" "Sir" "My Husband" etc. I get that those words do not mean "man" to us in this community - but I also get that those are words that have been used to describe men in various positions...well, for as long as those words have existed. Should we as a community reject those words? Should we be making up new words?

I'm not trying to be a shit-disturber by asking that question. I genuinely can't wrap my head around how one thing is diminishing and the other is perfectly acceptable. We cannot have it both ways.

[Heart]

For those who keep making this about CN, and saying that we have no idea what her personal identity and relationship is all about, you sure seem to know a lot about whether she understands BF lingo, queer culture, etc. Who the heck knows? But she is a smart, successful woman, who has supported both feminist and queer causes, and who has been in a queer relationship for quite a while now in New York City. She and her partner do not live under a rock. In light of that, I personally think her remark was careless and stupid and minimizing of masculine/butch women. I also think it probably was off-the-cuff and unintentional.

BUT as I've said 50 times in this thread, in fact I said it in my very first 2-sentence post, my point was how routine that kind of minimization is, how little we even notice it, and then how ferociously we justify it when its pointed out. This thread bears that out. We would never see this kind of response if a transman's identity was belittled, in fact I have seen the partners of transmen, often femmes, get called on the carpet and lectured about the ways that they need to uphold their partners identities.

So men's identities are delicate and valuable and must be preserved, but women's identities get no such regard. Interesting.

Anyhoo -- I think Bete asked a good question. It may be a different thread, but it's a good question. Bete - I think those words you mentioned are often erotically charged, which makes them quite different than routinely referring to butches as men I, however, would never call my female butch partner my "husband."

Heart

[betenoire]

Originally Posted by Heart

Anyhoo -- I think Bete asked a good question. It may be a different thread, but it's a good question. Bete - I think those words you mentioned are often erotically charged, which makes them quite different than routinely referring to butches as men I, however, would never call my female butch partner my "husband."

Heart

What about "Dude" "Bro" "Man"? (Man as in "Don't bogart that can, man" not as in MAN) "Bud" even, as far as I'm concerned, has male connotations. That shit gets thrown around constantly, and nobody bats an eye. I still fail to see how this is any different.

[Heart]

Originally Posted by betenoire

What about "Dude" "Bro" "Man"? (Man as in "Don't bogart that can, man" not as in MAN) "Bud" even, as far as I'm concerned, has male connotations. That shit gets thrown around constantly, and nobody bats an eye. I still fail to see how this is any different.

Hmmm... I kinda feel now like you''re just baiting me. I guess if you don't see the diff between generic "hay man," or " hey dude," and the way that CN attempted to explain/define her masculine female partner to the world as a "man with boobs" -- well, there sure isn't anything I'm gonna say that will make you see the difference.

By-the-way, recently when a male id'ed butch who is organizing on behalf of other butches of various identities referred to "brotherhood," I asked him if his organizing included "sisterhood." He allowed that it did.

Peace out dude.
Heart

[betenoire]

Originally Posted by Heart

Hmmm... I kinda feel now like you''re just baiting me. I guess if you don't see the diff between generic "hay man," or " hey dude," and the way that CN attempted to explain/define her masculine female partner to the world as a "man with boobs" -- well, there sure isn't anything I'm gonna say that will make you see the difference.

By-the-way, recently when a male id'ed butch who is organizing on behalf of other butches of various identities referred to "brotherhood," I asked him if his organizing included "sisterhood." He allowed that it did.

Peace out dude.
Heart

I am not trying to bait you. I am simply drawing a parallel between describing a masculine female as "man with boobs" and referring to masculine females (regardless of their ID, level of relationship, preferred pronoun, etc) as "he" (cuz, lemme tell you - some Butches hate that) "husband" "bro" etc. BOTH of those practices insinuate that the masculine female is less....female.

And don't you ever call me dude again, are we understood? I would accept being called bitch before I would accept being called dude - now who's baiting whom?

[Heart]

Originally Posted by betenoire

And don't you ever call me dude again, are we understood? I would accept being called bitch before I would accept being called dude - now who's baiting whom?

Huh? Attempt at levity - nothing more.

Soooooooooooooooooo.... this was fun.