Queer femmes representing

New (to me) at least blogger salty femme responds to/riffs off a very old (to me) persona/blog (which is new to her). posting here not so much because i want to get back into talking about I-Blame-The-Ennui, but because i think what SF is talking about here actually comes up fairly often in this here femisphere, and is also not totally unrelated to Battle Trans(bigots).



Interesting how the queer femme position complicates both sides of this debate: that femininity is inherently a tool of the patriarchy, and that femininity can be reclaimed without questioning and struggling with the ways that femininity is patriarchal. Also interesting that the queer femme is nowhere to be found in [the IBTP] thread. And I realize that my questions are novel. Stuck between these two positions is a hard place to be. But it helps to read why some feminists hate femininity so much – it helps me clarify why I agree to some extent, and why agreeing that femininity has been a tool of the patriarchy pushes me to own femininity and struggle with it instead of reject it. It’s the murky place of figuring out exactly how to do that that seems to really fuck people up.


And so I ask again, what does it mean to be a feminist and claim femininity, and not in the girly “I can’t get out of my comfort zone so I have to shave my legs and wear makeup but call it feminism to justify it” kind of way. In the way that my femininity belongs to me. Not to patriarchy. Seriously. Because I get to pick and choose; because I can control the way others respond to the gender I perform; because I still sport body hair with a sexy tank top and mascara and declare it as hot and mine and others respond in kind; because I don’t perform femininity for any man or even for any woman. I like femininity because I choose it, and not because I’ve been co-opted as a tool of the patriarchy. And I do it all as a feminist.

I also wonder what gender the femininity-hating feminists perform and how they make sense of it. Gender is a part of our world (a part that I actually enjoy) so I am genuinely curious as to how they see themselves and how they think others perceive them.

So how does being a queer femme give me special privilege to talk about femininity? Granted, I exist in this world and was socialized into the same one as straight women. At the same time, I imagine and seek out a world outside of the mainstream. In my attempts to stray from the mainstream, I realize also that the best way to fuck with patriarchy is to subvert it and not to reject it outright. Rejecting something means that you acknowledge its authority, power, and importance. It is completely exhausting and when it comes to gender, and to femininity more specifically, it doesn’t work. Queer femme means subverting femininity – gender is never meant to be taken at face value. It’s a game. The trick is figuring out the rules.


So right away those of you who've been following along in the peanut gallery can point to the places where the all-patriarchy-blaming-all-the-time crowd are gonna raise objections.

like, this:

I realize also that the best way to fuck with patriarchy is to subvert it and not to reject it outright.

...is gonna read like hopeless self-delusion at best, quietism or even sinister collusion with the forces of darkness at worst, to Certain Types.

And in the abstract, I could sort of understand that mindset: hey, if an Empire is Compleat Evil, then you don't negotiate with it; you don't compromise with it: it is a Fight to the Death, for True Freedom.

which, and even given the assumptions that 1) the Patriarchy -is- The Monolith, i.e. Sexism Trumps Everything Else and, 2) it's -all- hopelessly corrupt and tainted, there is -nothing- worth salvaging in the current Oppressive System (hypothetically you understand), well...okay! good luck with that there! and that hasn't really gotten off the ground in the past thirty years or so because?...

oh, right, i forgot (how quickly they forget):

In point of fact, right now, to be dedicated to an end to sexism and to gender, full stop, is to be relentlessly excoriated by people who call that “transphobic” and a whole lot of other nasty things and a lot of those people are MEN who do not care one whit if anything ever changes for women, they want the clock turned back hundreds of years to the time when they owned us outright.

...*in fact* radical feminists are responsible for *revolution for women in our time* and if misogynists of all and every stripe would get the fuck out of the way with their misogynist ideas and behaviors and projects which they think are oh-so-”progressive,” and “transgressive,” even though they take us back to pre-feminism days, we might be able to actually *finish* the revolution we fucking began.

...Heart


Right, anyway. Point being: an -end to gender.- Which is seen as part and parcel of "an end to sexism."

This is a very different goal and worldview from that expressed here:

Rejecting something means that you acknowledge its authority, power, and importance. It is completely exhausting and when it comes to gender, and to femininity more specifically, it doesn’t work...gender is never meant to be taken at face value. It’s a game.

And, further, the following Does Not Compute, to some:

Because I get to pick and choose; because I can control the way others respond to the gender I perform; because I still sport body hair with a sexy tank top and mascara and declare it as hot and mine and others respond in kind; because I don’t perform femininity for any man or even for any woman. I like femininity because I choose it, and not because I’ve been co-opted as a tool of the patriarchy. And I do it all as a feminist.

Please note: she doesn't say that doing these things in themselves are what MAKES her a feminist, or that they ARE particularly feminist in themselves, even. (if i am understanding correctly; i have my own bias there tho') She says she does them -as- a feminist.

iow: she is a feminist, and she is a (queer) femme. maybe she is not a feminist BECAUSE she is a femme, but, as i am reading this,

and not in the girly “I can’t get out of my comfort zone so I have to shave my legs and wear makeup but call it feminism to justify it” kind of way. In the way that my femininity belongs to me.


she is also clearly not willing to accept that she is a feminist IN SPITE of being femme. iow, without apologies to the more "advanced" feminism/ists. because she simply doesn't accept that implicit framework, to wit: start point: unthinking girlie-girl-->end point: patriarchy-throwing radical-feminist, free from all constraints, including gender. especially the feminine gender, if there is an "especially."

or, sigh, okay, quoting from the IBTP post SF is quoting:

Femininity is a set of practices and behaviors (boob jobs, FGM, ‘beauty’, the ‘veil’, the flirty head-tilt, pornaliciousness, BDSM, fashion, compulsory pregnancy, marriage, et al) that are dangerous, painful, pink, or otherwise destructive; that compel female subordination; that exist only to benefit Dude Nation; that are overwhelmingly represented by ‘girly’ feminists as a ‘choice’; and that are overwhelmingly represented by godbags and other irritating conservatives as ‘natural instincts’.

Which,

o, where to begin.

well, what SF says, for a start:

The author is clear to define femininity as the term is used on that specific blog. However, the definition is itself so patriarchal (taking away all agency re: femininity from women themselves) that I wanted to scream.

But, you see, let's be very clear (as i think the author sees it): the -author-, woman, radical feminist, is not taking away any agency from women, because not only is that the opposite of what she wants to do, but she cannot; the -patriarchy- did that. Women -have- no "agency," because the Patriarchy made and makes sure of it. You may think you have free choice, but it is an illusion. She's simply telling it as it is. QED. Take it or leave it (but she hopes you take it). In the land of the blind, etc. etc., not that we accept anything as patriarchal as "kings," one-eyed or otherwise, we hasten to add. Just imparting some hard-earned wisdom.

so, there's not really much point in discussing how y'know "beauty" practices (including for Menz!) or indeed other existing or historical ways of "doing" gender other than the rather painfully obviously culture-specific framework that the author is coming from, apart from the obligatory nod to "veils," because...yeah. that's a separate post, i think. stay tuned.

also, at some point, we really are going to have to sit down and talk about this whole "godbag" business.

but, like, okay, not -too- long ago, did you know, it was actually pink for -boys,- blue for girls. it reversed after WWI i believe, for reasons i do not recall at present.

which, i think the author and many others would dismiss as irrelevant; blue, pink, what's the difference? It's still them making us jump through hoops. Who cares what color the hoop is.

well, you get the idea. the notion that -it can and frequently does change at all-, this how-you-say "cultural construct," is apparently not sufficiently interesting to explore further. away with it; away with it all. okay.

now, BDSM thrown in there is interesting, although that, too, deserves a separate post.

but very briefly, just related to the gender aspect: previous discussions at the abode of this author as well as many of her regulars, and people who think similarly, and reading other, offline feminist predecessors whom some count (explicitly) among their influences, makes it pretty clear that "BDSM" overwhelmingly means "male/masculine/butch/top does classically spanky-hurty things to female/feminine/femme/bottom."

any other configuration, at least as I have been reading lo this past while, is generally glossed over or, when pressed, explained away as the woman fulfilling yet another dreary male fantasy, all uncomfortable ouchy shoes and plunging cleavage, daintily playing "mean sexy bitch" for a little while until everyone has an orgasm (orgasms are the opiate of the masses, pretty much, at least in TF land), and then it's back to business as usual.

and, of course: it's never -her- idea. Not at the patriarchally constructed root; and very probably not right there at the surface of the actual encounter, either; that is, she probably doesn't -want- this, certainly not more so than him.


Now, this is certainly not -my- experience of How This Works, and it doesn't seem to be SF's either, or some of the commenters. But: well, for our purposes here, does this matter?

Only in this: that in fact, the Author is reinforcing the (very patriarchal) idea that "feminine" is inextricably bound to "biologically female" AND to "bottom,"

which, in turn, means, "submissive to the man/masculine/top,"

which, in turn, means, o how to put this. At best:

"loser."

If not actual "victim." One-down, okay, and no, playing with it in fantasy doesn't help dislodge the way this works in "real" life; it just reinforces real-life male (as in, male, men) domination.

With me so far? Okay, because here's where it all comes together:

In other words, "gender" is a MALE thing. No matter what gender we're talking about (and really, there are only two, no matter how you slice it; and one -always- has power over the other, in a way that connects up with ). Because: "gender" cannot be a performance or a game: "gender" is a system of maintaining male power over women. Full stop.

Which is why "we" want to get rid of it.

As I am understanding it.

We are NOT, however, trying to get rid of -sex,- i.e. -biological-, -physical- (o but even here), differences.

Or, well, depending on who you ask, I suppose.

Judging from the recent spate of "I am WOMAN, I give BIRTH, I BLEED, I squirt MILK, i have been LABELLED GIRL by the PATRIARCHY and as such have SUFFERED ENORMOUSLY at the hands of MEN, and YOU HAVEN'T, NOT LIKE I HAVE, SO AWAY WITH YOU, YOU SURGICALLY 'MAN-MADE' IMPOSTER, GET OUT OF MY IDENTITY AND MY SKIN,"

at least, a lot of the people who want to "get rid of gender" are just fine and dandy with their sex (clinically defined). more than, even.

(I do not think that TF shares this biological essentialism, for the record).

So, but what we also see here is that in fact this is something that this branch of feminism and queer feminism -shares- (stay with me): the very basic understanding that gender=!sex.

The difference lies in what we think we ought to do about this.

In theory.

And yet...something just isn't adding up here, is it?

I mean, for me anyway. Because, I -know- what the world SF is talking about looks and feels like, because I see & experience people actually living it. A myriad of genders, played with. -And- a myriad of -sexes-, played with. -And- a number of ways to play with power. None of which, in fact, are -synonymous.- Mix n match. A zillion possible combinations. And, although yep we're all influenced by this our Patriarchal Culture (tm) and it doesn't No, it doesn't solve the world's problems, in and of itself; but how many people are actually saying that it does?

But, more to the point: so, okay, the idealized alternative to this alternative to the Patriarchy is just nuking the whole thing. kit n kaboodle. no more gender; no more -power.-

which, the latter, hoo boy, that is -also- a post in itself, or several.

but okay, just sticking to gender, then, this is the part of SF's post i find most intriguing:

I also wonder what gender the femininity-hating feminists perform and how they make sense of it. Gender is a part of our world (a part that I actually enjoy) so I am genuinely curious as to how they see themselves and how they think others perceive them.

And I find myself wondering that as well.

So, now what I want to ask of this feminists who adhere more or less to this school(s) of thought (and also please, correct any misunderstanding as you see it) is this:

Taking it for granted that you are a "woman," either because of your physiological born-with bits, the label -given- to you by the Patriarchy, okay (this is also an argument), or both. And that you are trying to go about creating a world where "gender" is done away with.

Do you perceive yourself to have any gender -now-? If so, what is it? And, how do you propose doing away with it, if that is indeed the goal?

If not--i.e. you think you are gender-free right now: what leads you to this conclusion?

Curious.