Where are the femmes at?

[Night_Jasmine]

My grandmother couldn't even pump her own gas. I learned how to do that early on and shocked the heck out of my grandparents when I went out to change their tire. My father had taught my brother and I had watched one lesson, not interacting just observing. My grandfather tightened up the bolts after I had done (he's had both knees replaced so kneeling is hard) and then called my dad - did you know your daughter can change a tire?

*giggles* They thought I was too girly to pay attention or something, but I didn't want to rely on anyone to do it for me on the road if I ever got a flat.

 

[SweetCherry]

My grandmother couldn't even pump her own gas. I learned how to do that early on and shocked the heck out of my grandparents when I went out to change their tire. My father had taught my brother and I had watched one lesson, not interacting just observing. My grandfather tightened up the bolts after I had done (he's had both knees replaced so kneeling is hard) and then called my dad - did you know your daughter can change a tire?

*giggles* They thought I was too girly to pay attention or something, but I didn't want to rely on anyone to do it for me on the road if I ever got a flat.

My dad was determined that if I knew how to drive, I knew how to take care of things like tire changes and oil and filter changes. Back when I was driving an old Dodge Dart, I even knew how to get the darn thing started if it flooded, which it sometimes did. I remember the looks I got from my friends when my car didn't start and I got out, popped the hood, took off the air cleaner and propped open the butterfly valve. Mind you, I was still in high school at the time, so my friends had no clue what I was capable of. I even remember once dating a boy who had no clue how to check or change the oil on his car. I had to show him how. He was totally clueless. *laughs*

 

[Tymeless]

My dad was determined that if I knew how to drive, I knew how to take care of things like tire changes and oil and filter changes. Back when I was driving an old Dodge Dart, I even knew how to get the darn thing started if it flooded, which it sometimes did. I remember the looks I got from my friends when my car didn't start and I got out, popped the hood, took off the air cleaner and propped open the butterfly valve. Mind you, I was still in high school at the time, so my friends had no clue what I was capable of. I even remember once dating a boy who had no clue how to check or change the oil on his car. I had to show him how. He was totally clueless. *laughs*

other then changing a tire or wiring a speaker system i don't have a clue how to do much in a car. *giggles* My grandma had never pumped gas until after my grandfather died i find that quite sad that men felt they had to baby women like that.

 

[Night_Jasmine]

My pawpaw wouldn't have called it babying. In their day, women didn't work on cars - including pumping gas. It wasn't ladylike and no man would be caught dead allowing a woman to do such a thing.

In a way, it's romantic.

 

[Tymeless]

My pawpaw wouldn't have called it babying. In their day, women didn't work on cars - including pumping gas. It wasn't ladylike and no man would be caught dead allowing a woman to do such a thing.

In a way, it's romantic.

Other then once the man was dead and gone these women are nothing but helpless children because they were treated fragile. There is a fine line between Chivalry and just treating women like children.

 

[Night_Jasmine]

*smiles tearfully* I wish you could've met my grandparents, Tiffany, before my granny lost the fight to heart disease. She was his queen, he was her king. He took care of her and she him. It wasn't babying at all.

They shared fifty years of wedded happiness, weathering the death of a child, her own ill health, and financial ups and downs.

*giggles sadly* If anything, the babying and spoiling was given to grandkids and great grandchildren.

 

[Gi_Venus]

other then changing a tire or wiring a speaker system i don't have a clue how to do much in a car. *giggles* My grandma had never pumped gas until after my grandfather died i find that quite sad that men felt they had to baby women like that.

I do not know...smile..I like to be babied a little. Back then people had well defined roles...and cherished them. It can be a beautiful thing when it works.

 

[Tymeless]

I do not know...smile..I like to be babied a little. Back then people had well defined roles...and cherished them. It can be a beautiful thing when it works.

These roles that still exist in some way or another are the reason people like me and you are so conflicted with ourselves about our gender. I want treated like a woman but i don't know if i would want treated like a woman 50 years ago. Yes its sweet and cute and things until one or the other passes away and the other doesn't know how to take care of simple everyday things. Its fine if you don't know how to fix your car or cook and extravagant meal but its completely another not knowing how to pump gas or do your own laundry. I'm saying that women while its sweet and romantic still should of known how to do these things on their own at some point as men should of known how to do things she knew how to do. I mean seriously after my grandfather died my grandmother didn't even know how to pump gas and had to call my father and have him come do it for her. She was crippled for a long time after his death because of little things like that she didn't know how to do for herself. I want to be pampered like a woman as much as anyone else but i don't want coddled is what i'm trying to say I think.

 

[ungenderless]

These roles that still exist in some way or another are the reason people like me and you are so conflicted with ourselves about our gender. I want treated like a woman but i don't know if i would want treated like a woman 50 years ago. Yes its sweet and cute and things until one or the other passes away and the other doesn't know how to take care of simple everyday things. Its fine if you don't know how to fix your car or cook and extravagant meal but its completely another not knowing how to pump gas or do your own laundry. I'm saying that women while its sweet and romantic still should of known how to do these things on their own at some point as men should of known how to do things she knew how to do. I mean seriously after my grandfather died my grandmother didn't even know how to pump gas and had to call my father and have him come do it for her. She was crippled for a long time after his death because of little things like that she didn't know how to do for herself. I want to be pampered like a woman as much as anyone else but i don't want coddled is what i'm trying to say I think.

That's a good point. I guess the best way would be to know how to do these things, but not have to do it on account of being spoiled. ^__~

 

[Tymeless]

That's a good point. I guess the best way would be to know how to do these things, but not have to do it on account of being spoiled. ^__~

yeah thats the idea!

 

[Gi_Venus]

These roles that still exist in some way or another are the reason people like me and you are so conflicted with ourselves about our gender. I want treated like a woman but i don't know if i would want treated like a woman 50 years ago. Yes its sweet and cute and things until one or the other passes away and the other doesn't know how to take care of simple everyday things. Its fine if you don't know how to fix your car or cook and extravagant meal but its completely another not knowing how to pump gas or do your own laundry. I'm saying that women while its sweet and romantic still should of known how to do these things on their own at some point as men should of known how to do things she knew how to do. I mean seriously after my grandfather died my grandmother didn't even know how to pump gas and had to call my father and have him come do it for her. She was crippled for a long time after his death because of little things like that she didn't know how to do for herself. I want to be pampered like a woman as much as anyone else but i don't want coddled is what i'm trying to say I think.

It is always nice to be resolute and fluid in our approach to life, but frankly many do not have the ability, and besides...sometimes it is a gift to a life partner to give them some significance, it is the ritual of intimacy...the little gifts that we do for each other, it is all very subtle... we all know how to open doors, but to allow someone to open it for you is to acknowledge their grace. Long time life partners fall into roles that work for them......the loss of one is horrific.... But to define it in the terms of survival seems coarse to me. Why not give generously to those that we love... My ex cannot do a lot of things...she refuses...but does that make her less? Should helpless people be less...and really when it comes to fear and uncertainty of an unknown who can know but the person experiencing it themselves.
To be honest I am not gifted in certain areas, I would love it if someone took over some parts of my life..... so for me...Yes to coddle....grin...especially if you care about me.

 

[interfacial]

Alright, so maybe I am trying to liven up the board a bit, and this post may be off topic, but really, the topic of this thread is really really broad anyway.

I'm a femme dyke. That's me in the photo. I do hate that people don't realize I'm gay though - I constantly get mistaken for straight. When I'm in queer space, I love being appreciated for a femme, but when I'm in straight space I hate that I get overlooked as a member of queer culture.

I don't think you can really avoid it though unless you post a big sign on yourself that says "I'm a femme dyke". Heterosexuality, sadly, is considered the norm and unless you actually say anything, about nine times out of ten people will assume you're straight. I understand where you're coming from with this, even though I cannot completely empathize (sp?).

Am I crazy? Do the way these posts come off not bother anyone else at all? I am a femme bisexual (at least in dress/looks), so maybe there is just a disconnect for me that prevents me from understanding some things. Maybe I am just paranoid of people and an obnoxious person. Sometimes, I really get the feeling that some people are gay for the purpose of being a 'minority culture', not so much that they have sex with the same sex. I honestly believe that there is absolutely no such thing as gay culture, and there should not be such a thing as gay culture.

Now, I know Etoile is not some highschool girl pretending to be gay so that she can stand out, but it's the concept that homosexuals should somehow automatically stand out from heterosexuals that just completely fries my brain. The idea that being mistaken for being heterosexual, or to assume a person will be heterosexual is bad/sad, when most people are heterosexual, or bisexual which involves heterosexuality anyway, is just ridiculous to me. As is the idea that a homosexual 'lifestyle' exists. The idea that such a thing would exist would mean that there is something truly different about homosexuals than their heterosexual neighbors, friends, and family. If that were the case, then it feels like a basis for discrimination would exist. The idea just really rubs me the wrong way.

 

[neonflux]

Alright, so maybe I am trying to liven up the board a bit, and this post may be off topic, but really, the topic of this thread is really really broad anyway.






Am I crazy? Do the way these posts come off not bother anyone else at all? I am a femme bisexual (at least in dress/looks), so maybe there is just a disconnect for me that prevents me from understanding some things. Maybe I am just paranoid of people and an obnoxious person. Sometimes, I really get the feeling that some people are gay for the purpose of being a 'minority culture', not so much that they have sex with the same sex. I honestly believe that there is absolutely no such thing as gay culture, and there should not be such a thing as gay culture.

Now, I know Etoile is not some highschool girl pretending to be gay so that she can stand out, but it's the concept that homosexuals should somehow automatically stand out from heterosexuals that just completely fries my brain. The idea that being mistaken for being heterosexual, or to assume a person will be heterosexual is bad/sad, when most people are heterosexual, or bisexual which involves heterosexuality anyway, is just ridiculous to me. As is the idea that a homosexual 'lifestyle' exists. The idea that such a thing would exist would mean that there is something truly different about homosexuals than their heterosexual neighbors, friends, and family. If that were the case, then it feels like a basis for discrimination would exist. The idea just really rubs me the wrong way.

I identify as queer - and yes, I think there's a difference, particularly at the extremes. there is a sense of camp and style, there is a way of playing with gender that doesn't exist in the straight world. There is humor, there is art, there is music that stands on its own. And yes, there are people who are conservative, who have more in common culturally with their fellow church members than they do with the drag kings and queens in the lgbtq pride parade. Who are a little ashamed of Justin Bond and Harvey Feirstein (sp?) and Quentin Crisp and Lea Deloria and stone butch women.

For me, sorry, that's not where I live. I miss "my folks" when I am away from them for too long. And I don't want my world to disappear, to be assimilated. Which is why I identified so with Etoile's comment - and it's not that I care what straight folks think - it's that I care to be recognized by "my own." This has nothing to do with wanting to be a "minority." (I live in San Francisco, btw, where I am not.)

you asked...

so i gave

my 2¢
Neon

 

[neonflux]

from another thread on identity...

i'm not saying that you're not "truly" lgbt if you identify more with mainstream culture than queer, or that you're more lgbt if you do. certainly we should have the right to live our lives as we would, as we feel comfortable. but there IS a difference and it's a difference that I love and celebrate...

Neon

 

[Equinoxe]

Since someone has conveniently introduced the topic of identity politics, such as it were, I shall have to address a few points made.

I'm a femme dyke. That's me in the photo. I do hate that people don't realize I'm gay though - I constantly get mistaken for straight. When I'm in queer space, I love being appreciated for a femme, but when I'm in straight space I hate that I get overlooked as a member of queer culture.

I can understand your frustration from a practical standpoint, but the concept of "straight space" and "queer space" eludes me: I understand what you mean by the phrases, but I do not "get" it.

OK, found this browsing the W4W section on Craig's List this AM, thought it appropriate to post, with a big & & to the poster, whoever she might be ...

What thread on the topic wouldn't be complete without a paean to bizarrely affected heteronormativity.

i'm not saying that you're not "truly" lgbt if you identify more with mainstream culture than queer, or that you're more lgbt if you do. certainly we should have the right to live our lives as we would, as we feel comfortable. but there IS a difference and it's a difference that I love and celebrate...

There is a difference between what exactly?

 

[neonflux]

There is a difference between what exactly?

Read post just before yours - between queer and, I won't say straight but "normative" culture...

In case you didn't follow the link the first time, here it is again...

from another thread on identity...

If you have any specific questions or disputes, I would be happy to respond.

~ Neon

 

[Equinoxe]

Read post just before yours - between queer and, I won't say straight but "normative" culture...

In case you didn't follow the link the first time, here it is again...

from another thread on identity...

If you have any specific questions or disputes, I would be happy to respond.

~ Neon

I quoted the post before mine, so it's relatively safe to assume that I read it, and I did read the link (in fact, I am fairly certain I read it when you originally posted it), but I don't think anyone suggested that there wasn't a difference between queer culture and "normative" culture, inasmuch as those designations suffice.

She stated that she believed there is no such thing as "gay culture" (whether or not she believes correctly depends on what one means by "gay culture") and went on to suggest that the existence of a homosexual "lifestyle" would imply an essential difference, other than the definitional issue of attraction/sexuality/romance, between gay people and straight people. From her second suggestion, we may reasonably assume what she means by "gay culture"—and by the definition implied, there is no "gay culture" (in the sense of something intangibly tied and fundamental to being gay).

Now, you said in response that there was a difference (without stating between what) and prefaced that with your identification as "queer" (note the absence of that c word). You went on to discuss, with a few subtle barbs thrown in, LGBT people with whom you do not culturally identify (note the use of that c word). In your second post, you reiterated that there is a difference (again, without explicitly stating between what) after an irrelevant invocation of rights (I would hope it is obvious to everyone here that people may live their lives as they choose) and stated that you aren't intimating the superiority of one LGBT cultural paradigm over the other.

I quote, without specific comment, from your post that you linked:

I guess my point here is that queerness really is more than just a label - it is a way of being in the world that includes all of this gender play and ambiguity, and that encompasses an aesthetic and world view that transcends cultural boundaries. When I am separated from it for a long time (as I often am at the conferences I must attend because of my job) I crave contact with it - it embraces me as though I am a
long-lost child coming home. And if I know where to search for it, I can find and recognize it whether I am in San Francisco, London, Mexico City, Berlin, Thailand, Budapest or Tokyo...

This might be coming across much bitchier than I intend for it to be. There is something here—overall—that I find interesting.

 

[Tara S]

I knew nothing of the complex gender/identity/sexuality politics in the GLBT scene until I recently became involved with another woman.

It's interesting and from my perspective a little confusing. I was surprised in one instance when I was given a bit of a cold shoulder from someone, who was formally quite friendly, when through our conversation she realized that I didn't hate men or see being with women only as my exclusive future.

Anyway as someone on the periphery - I'm sure going to stay there at least in terms of gender politics.

 

[neonflux]

I quoted the post before mine, so it's relatively safe to assume that I read it, and I did read the link (in fact, I am fairly certain I read it when you originally posted it), but I don't think anyone suggested that there wasn't a difference between queer culture and "normative" culture, inasmuch as those designations suffice.

She stated that she believed there is no such thing as "gay culture" (whether or not she believes correctly depends on what one means by "gay culture") and went on to suggest that the existence of a homosexual "lifestyle" would imply an essential difference, other than the definitional issue of attraction/sexuality/romance, between gay people and straight people. From her second suggestion, we may reasonably assume what she means by "gay culture"—and by the definition implied, there is no "gay culture" (in the sense of something intangibly tied and fundamental to being gay).

Now, you said in response that there was a difference (without stating between what) and prefaced that with your identification as "queer" (note the absence of that c word). You went on to discuss, with a few subtle barbs thrown in, LGBT people with whom you do not culturally identify (note the use of that c word). In your second post, you reiterated that there is a difference (again, without explicitly stating between what) after an irrelevant invocation of rights (I would hope it is obvious to everyone here that people may live their lives as they choose) and stated that you aren't intimating the superiority of one LGBT cultural paradigm over the other.

I quote, without specific comment, from your post that you linked:


This might be coming across much bitchier than I intend for it to be. There is something here—overall—that I find interesting.

Now how did I throw barbs at people who didn't identify with "queer culture?" It was the poster to whom I was responding who stated that,

Sometimes, I really get the feeling that some people are gay for the purpose of being a 'minority culture', not so much that they have sex with the same sex.

If my post was "barbed," the barbs were aimed at the assumption that one's appreciation of "queer culture/gay identity" grew out of one's "desire to be a minority" as well as the statement that gay culture should not exist.

Regarding the "C" word - I am wondering why you put this in quotes - my first response is that you must somehow see it as "dirty word" when used within the context of identity. However, I don't want to assume anything here.

Re: The last paragraph of mine that you quoted, I understand all culture as a construct (my BA was in anthropology), and view the construction of queer culture as a fairly modern (200 year-old) phenomena. Which of course would also mean that the construction of lgbtq identities is also a modern phenomenon. That said, there is a recognizable difference between many people who now call ourselves gay, lesbian, bi and who are trans, much of it related to non-normative gender expression and experience that is common to many - certainly not all - of us. While it is much more complex than gender alone, much of what is often identified as "gay culture" in the current western world, certainly plays with gender roles.

Certainly, this "inherent difference" to which I referred has been recognized in many places on the globe at different times in history. Just a few examples... There were a number of traditional indigenous American peoples who viewed gender-varient people as having very specific spiritual roles within a community (white anthropologists used the term berdache to describe these people). Character roles in Japanese Kabuki theatre are structured around 6 genders, all of which are immediately recognizable as such to people who grew up outside of the culture and know little about the theatrical form - hyperfeminine women, feminine women, masculine women, feminine men, masculine men, and hypermasculine men. The English term "dandy" first found popular usage in the 1790's and was used to describe men that fit today's stereotyped "homosexual." (Yes, I do recognize that many of those referred to as dandies actually enjoyed sex with women.) From the little fragments of poetry and history that we have, Lesbos was more than just an "island" in Greece.

And no, you didn't sound bitchy - you did sound a little like my sister, who is an academic...

~ Neon

 

[Equinoxe]

Now how did I throw barbs at people who didn't identify with "queer culture?" It was the poster to whom I was responding who stated that,

If my post was "barbed," the barbs were aimed at the assumption that one's appreciation of "queer culture/gay identity" grew out of one's "desire to be a minority" as well as the statement that gay culture should not exist.

I might accept that you (a Queer-identified, Pagan, Liberal San Franciscan, if I recall correctly) would intend use "conservative" and "fellow church members" neutrally in a discussion of queer identity politics, but considering it presents a false dichotomy and uses terms which are loaded in context, it strikes me as, at least, negligent.

It didn't seem to me that you were directing any barbs towards the assumption that queer culture grew out of the desire to be a minority; most of your post, it seems at least to me, was not "barbed", but there were a few instances, like I said, and they were directed at people with whom you do not culturally identify.

Regarding the "C" word - I am wondering why you put this in quotes - my first response is that you must somehow see it as "dirty word" when used within the context of identity. However, I don't want to assume anything here.

I didn't put the c word (culture, to include derived forms in other word classes) in quotes, so I'm slightly confused. Do you mean, putting "queer" in quotes? I admit that I've never been fond of the term, but my reason for that was twyfold: firstly, it was in reference to your self-designation, specifically in reference to your usage of the term (which has multiple potential uses), and furthermore to demonstrate a distinction on my part between "queer" and "queer culture". The earlier use of "gay culture" in quotes was for similar reasons, but regarding her use of the term.

Re: The last paragraph of mine that you quoted, I understand all culture as a construct (my BA was in anthropology), and view the construction of queer culture as a fairly modern (200 year-old) phenomena. Which of course would also mean that the construction of lgbtq identities is also a modern phenomenon. That said, there is a recognizable difference between many people who now call ourselves gay, lesbian, bi and who are trans, much of it related to non-normative gender expression and experience that is common to many - certainly not all - of us. While it is much more complex than gender alone, much of what is often identified as "gay culture" in the current western world, certainly plays with gender roles.

I am not necessarily inclined to disagree with you in particular here, except to distinguish between different varieties of "culture": queer culture, inasmuch as we may assume it to exist, is not a culture in the same sense as, say, Italian culture.

Certainly, this "inherent difference" to which I referred has been recognized in many places on the globe at different times in history. Just a few examples... There were a number of traditional indigenous American peoples who viewed gender-varient people as having very specific spiritual roles within a community (white anthropologists used the term berdache to describe these people). Character roles in Japanese Kabuki theatre are structured around 6 genders, all of which are immediately recognizable as such to people who grew up outside of the culture and know little about the theatrical form - hyperfeminine women, feminine women, masculine women, feminine men, masculine men, and hypermasculine men. The English term "dandy" first found popular usage in the 1790's and was used to describe men that fit today's stereotyped "homosexual." (Yes, I do recognize that many of those referred to as dandies actually enjoyed sex with women.) From the little fragments of poetry and history that we have, Lesbos was more than just an "island" in Greece.

Yes, I know that there are a number of distinctions made by different societies in history (and presently). I am aware of the two-spirit phenomenon amongst many Native American groups, but the two-spirit didn't constitute a separate culture. Amongst the other people dubbed Indians, distinctions have also been historically made, such the hijira: in the Vinaya, too, there is a discussion of the four genders. Overall, though, I am not sure how this is related to your premise.

Regarding Kabuki (Kabuki wa...), I find that characterisation unusual: it strikes me rather like declaring Capitano and Arlecchino to be separate sexes. If you have an academic source on that (in English, since my Japanese is limited, I'm afraid), I would love to read it. Even so, I'm not sure it's entirely relevant.

Now, I am going to have to dispute that "dandies" are apropos the conversation. If you want to argue that gender roles have a great deal of flexibility in general, I absolutely agree, but that doesn't have any specific relevance to "queer culture" anymore so than it does "normative culture" (as evidenced by your reference to the heterosexuality of many of those aforementioned dandies).

On the last, I have to disagree. Lesbos was just an island and that interpretation of Sappho is more the product of a Christian misunderstanding of Greek religious and poetic forms. The Greeks and Romans certainly didn't think she was a lesbian (in the modern sense)—in fact, according to later legend, she committed suicide over a man. Greek and Roman societies had very little interest in [romance and sexuality between] women, though. In any case, in Classical times, Lesbos had a reputation regarding sexuality, but one which is, suffice it to say, incompatible with that.

So, I'm not sure what exactly you are getting at. If you're arguing that a number of societies have distinguished between different sexualities and gender variants—of course. And if you're arguing that modern Western queer culture is a specific variant of that—okay. However, if you're arguing that it's an inevitability based upon some innate difference—I disagree. I do not find self ownership of the old "third sex" to be worthwhile.

And no, you didn't sound bitchy - you did sound a little like my sister, who is an academic...

~ Neon

I don't know your sister or anything about your relationship with her, so I choose to interpret this as complimentary (or at least neutral).

 

[neonflux]

This certainly encapsulates the turn of the "dialogue," LOL.

I might accept that you (a Queer-identified, Pagan, Liberal San Franciscan, if I recall correctly) ....

edited...

I don't know your sister or anything about your relationship with her, so I choose to interpret this as complimentary (or at least neutral).

http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q91/cleasf/biteornot.jpg

: swims slowly past the lure, leaving the bloody little bait bits for someone else :

~ Neon

 

[Equinoxe]

This certainly encapsulates the turn of the "dialogue," LOL.

...

: swims slowly past the lure, leaving the bloody little bait bits for someone else :

~ Neon

I don't think that encapsulates the dialogue at all (and I don't think the quotation marks are necessary—I thought we were having a nice discussion).

 

[Filly Gal]

Yeesh!! Labels, labels everywhere! Who gives a damn!! Just show me your TITS!!

 

[bustyblondebombshell]

Yeesh!! Labels, labels everywhere! Who gives a damn!! Just show me your TITS!!

I'll second that

 

[neonflux]

I'll second that

LOL, never let anyone accuse us queer gals of not taking ourselves too seriously.

~ Neon