I can’t count the number of times I’ve been asked, or told, that I am “the girl” in a gay relationship, just because my hair was long, or I wore a dress once. Even after chopping my hair, the eyeliner and boots still categorize me as “the woman.”
If you’re a lesbian reading this, you’re nodding along with me. Maddening, isn’t it?
Don’t blame them. The concept of a lesbian relationship as a partnership is foreign to people outside the community.
Why? Gender roles that are a part of everyday life. Occupations are gender defined, domestic roles are gender defined. In every partnership, there is a man and a woman. Masculine and Feminine. Submissive and Dominant.
The lesbian community was once guilty of strictly adhering to the gender poles. The butch/femme community of the 1950s was cruel to those femme’s who were attracted to femmes and butch’s who were attracted to butch’s. There was no switching teams, either. Once a femme, always a femme, etc.
The 1970s saw a radical change in viewpoint with the rise of feminist theory and sexual politics. Women who saw themselves as butch, and committed to butch/femme relationships were seen as self-deprecating. Man was the enemy, and woman was the goddess.
And then we grew up. Kind of.
Androgyny is the new lesbian trend. Thank you, Shane McCutcheon.
Short hair, ambiguous wardrobes, and guy-liner have made it so that butch and femme have combined into today’s “Uber-lesbian” or “pretty boi.”
But still, the question persists.
Our response?
“Asking a lesbian which partner is the “man” is like asking which chopstick is the fork.”
I have a vagina. So does my girlfriend. We’re both women, thanks.
Hahaha. I love this. "I have a vagina. So does my girlfriend." I'm going to quote you, because that is the best answer I've heard.
ReplyDeleteI'm not gay. It's clear who is the girl and who is the guy in my relationship, but I get the same thing in a slightly different way. I look like a girl (as in long hair, occasional makeup and painted toenails) but I open my mouth and people are like, "You should totally be a guy." Hmmm..and just what does that mean?
The labeling thing is annoying. Yes, I let my stepson play with dolls, gave him makeovers, and I let my girls play with Tonka trucks and let them chop their hair off and ride skateboards. My stepson is still a very well rounded, so far straight boy. (he's quite fascinated by girls at the moment) My girls are still into makeup and dresses (sometimes) and think Justin Beiber is Hhhhottt.
Haha! The Justin Beiber thing is questionable, as several lesbians idolize him and try desperately to copy his haircut. I think he's ridiculous, but that's another post, sometime in the future I'm sure.
ReplyDeleteYea, you're definitely the dude. ;) Either that, or you're a lesbian and Kurt is the woman. Win-win, I say.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think you're right, but lets not forget, society encompasses EVERYONE.
ReplyDeletePeople NEED labels. Chair, table, girl, boy, condom...
If we didn't have labels, we couldn't classify, and if we couldn't classify, we couldn't compare. I dare you to find someone who doesn't just love to compare.
That being said, I think labeling onesself is completely justified, healthy. People need to have a clear view of themselves, otherwise they cannot accurately represent themselves to others.
Its when people try to label others that problems arise.
hate labels... I think society needs to label things to make themselves feel better about someone who is different than themselves (the norm, of course. ha). It's ridiculous really.
ReplyDeleteAnd to answer the question as to which one of you is the dude? Most likely it's the girl I'm seeing.
Very, very true. You always have excellent points.
ReplyDeleteI was thinking about people labeling others, not in the general sense of people having to label things like a chair or something.
I know we have had conversations similar to this in the past, but its always nice to hear what you have to say.
Kurt keeps that wish in his prayers, which means he's definitely the guy, no?
ReplyDeleteI know what you were talking about. I was making a ridiculous comparison to show that your wording had flaws. :)
ReplyDelete