|
newer-older-profile-gbook-notes- e-mail-dland gender disputes. 11.23.02 at 12:18 am 0 comments so far 12.10am. i think i pissed her off because i said "he" when it could have been "she"�which undermines the idea that it's okay to be a masculine woman� that to be masculine is inherently male, but it's not! to say "he," to a female, undermines the expectectation . and it's a dyke/queer tranny boy's fantasy. 12.18am. and, at least, it's mine. i cherish the moments when someone says "he" knowing that i don't have the parts on my person. but, labelling me "that way" does not mean i reject the fact that i am female. nor does undermine my identity as "not being a man." in other words, i am not moving from a lesbian identity to a male identity in order to make socially acceptable a lesbian identity by presenting it as heterosexuality. i do not identify as male or female, and/or gay or straight, and/or woman or man...i resist. but my resistance is not, simultaneously, a rejection of either. it is the sythesis, i believe. by neither resisting, nor accepting, and most importantly not ignoring. i am undermining, hating, remember and cherishing all parts. and this is what makes my life so beautiful and painful. 9.15a is the movement/transition of woman-identified to male-identified undermining the potential cohesion of "the women's community"? And who is responsible for maintaining this cohesion? and, perhaps more importantly, who is responsible for the reduction in cohesion? can someone, a woman, who is female-identified fully comprehend the complexities of being female and male-identified without simplifying the situation to a transition from one pole to another? the category of woman and who is "allowed into" the women's community is defined by women who are women in its "purest" form. -is it fair to blame the lack of community cohesion on those who transgress gender boundaries? -is the very strength of women's movements and communities the ability to undermine mainstream patriarchal values [ie, allowing all women a forum for potentially powerful action, the potential freedom to transgress boundaries]? in minority politics, when has it ever wholly been the responsibilities of minorities to gain equal access to mainstream society? so, then, why is it the responsibility of gender transgressors to make amends with the women's community? why do have to remedy my rejection from a community that ignores parts of who i am in order to gain a status of inclusion? is that really inclusion? -male-identification is not a rejection of femininity or a female identity inherently. the undermining of the women's community s the undermining of a narrow definition of who and what is a women. -what needs to come is not just the incorporation of all female-bodied persons. there needs to be an upheaval of the women's community. an all encompassing community cannot come from a history that has excluded certain kinds of women. we need a new community�one without the value laden definitions of who and what is an appropriate woman�one that embraces females in all gender expressions. as gender actors we face similar boundaries and consequences. we need a community that is defined from the fight against gender oppressions, not based on definitions of who we are and who we are not. [of course, now we can talk about social movement theory in terms of whether there needs to be a collective identity in order to have collective action...blablabla. we need a new framework to discuss this stuff.] |