women who don't fit those molds; new paradigms (civil, please)

[Stella_Omega]

Part of this is C&P from my other posts.

Here are my request for this thread; Please do NOT use that old, tired "you (social or political group) are all alike." even in jest. Come up with something new, if only as a writing challenge.

Please do NOT assume the right to speak for everyone.

Please make your thrust clear, (yum) in the original post, and do not have tantrums if you didn't get understood; please, please, just say "sorry, what I meant was;"

in short, a civil conversation about the ways that previous feminine stereotypes do not apply to a significant group of women.

I began writing porn because I could not find anything that got me off or spoke to my own identity, in what was available-- back around 1974.

I was born in a female body. it's a pretty good looking body for a female-- not a tank or a pig, or a dog in any way. I even worked as a fashion model in my youth.

But I've never been "female." I have never conformed to society's expectations for girlish behaviour, or ambitions, or desires or needs. I never cared about clothes or makeup, I never spent hours giggling with and plotting against other girls-- and in fact, I never met many girls who did act like that, by the way. I was loyal to my girl friends, and caring, and what is now called a "boi"--and the fact that there is a term for it, is something I'll get back to.

I was promiscuous sexually-- it was the era of free love, after all-- and unfathful and never expected sexual monogamy in any relationship. Nor did I expect special consideration from a guy just because we'd fucked-- money or material gain. Friendship, and another go-- that I would expect.
I knew about my SM needs, from a very early age. Girls didn't do that. They got to be slaves like 'O' or get their limbs sawn off like DeSade's Gomorrites. Or they got to be the Ice Princess for some poor shlub like Masoch.

Since the advent of the internet, I've run into more people like myself than I could have imagined existed back in the day. There are enough queers out there that I don't even have to like all of them-- Like the demographics are astonishingly widespread. and many of them are my age, or even older, meaning that there were a lot of isolated queer teens back in the seventies who somehow managed to hang on to ourselves in the face of overwhelming societal indifference at the best.

So my experience is of a small but significant move forward. But then I have pressing reason to experience it that way-- those who don't need to, aren't going to go looking for it. And as we see, when those who aren't looking for change do encounter it, they often resist the notion vigorously.

I often encounter the reaction, as I have in Doc's current threads here, where, faced with a change in paradigms, the person will demand acknowledgement of the old paradigm, because by god it's VALID!!!! In the frenzy, they often seem to lose the opportunity to acknowledge the also-valid new premise. Witness Xssve's insistence that I acknowledge the validity of the "using woman" after I said that it wasn't universally applicable, not for all men or all women.

Going back to the term "boi"; It did not exist back when I was one. It does exist now, and seems to have moved usage from a tiny subset of lesbians to the queer community in general, and now is showing up in a hetero usage-- and thank goodness, too, because straight women are not all of them feminine femmes! So that should be one example of a new awareness.

But even though I would have been glad to have a name for myself, even then I would have known that it was inadequate as a single descriptor. I'm going back to find two posts, per xssve's request, that describe my more personal experiences, post those later.

 

[cloudy]

I began writing because most of the erotica I ran across was clearly written with men in mind (to me). The women were all two dimensional fucktoys with no thought in their heads beyond what sexy lingerie to wear next.

I saw a huge lack of strong, intelligent women who enjoyed sex (what a concept!). So yeah, I don't seem to fit any mold out there, either. But it's all good.

 

[3113]

I never spent hours giggling with and plotting against other girls

Oh, Stella! Are you saying those hours we spent giggling together, plotting against all the other girls on the AH were a sham? I thought you were genuine! I'm never going to go out shopping for make-up and high heels with you again! (Runs off weeping)

 

[xssve]

I'm totally not getting this part about "Xssve's insistence that I acknowledge the validity of the "using woman" after I said that it wasn't universally applicable, not for all men or all women", I never insisted any such thing, except in your imagination, nothing is universally applicable, this is not a new paradigm", it's assumed by most rational people when discussing symbolism.

Not trying to be uncivil, but I'm detecting a very large chip on your shoulder here, and I frankly don't see how I can communicate anything at all with any assurance that it won't automatically be taken in worst possible way and I can only expect hostility in response.

I really don't want to get into that again right now, so carry on.

 

[xssve]

But here you go - I'm fascinated by sexually voracious women - except with a sense of humor.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I'm totally not getting this part about "Xssve's insistence that I acknowledge the validity of the "using woman" after I said that it wasn't universally applicable, not for all men or all women", I never insisted any such thing, except in your imagination, nothing is universally applicable, this is not a new paradigm", it's assumed by most rational people when discussing symbolism.

I do apologise for naming a name, and instantly breaking my own request for civil discussion!

I am simply reporting on my own experiences, and I tend to frame my experiences in specifics. My point is, always, that no individual is served by universals generalities, or stereotypes-- most especially if they are aimed at that person's group. It is often a way of trivialising everything else about that person in particular. And that is very often of great use to the aimer-- so stereotypes are a defensive weapon, and we all know that offensive is better. AS a member of several groups that are poorly served by these symbolisms, I want to point out that what is symbolic to you has practical implications for me.

If you would like to discuss the way these gender stereotypes have become so prevalent as to seem universal to huge swaths of the human race-- to the detriment of both sexes, in my personal opinion-- you are most welcome.

But I can go back and copy and paste the post that lead me to use your name in example, if you wish, It's very typical, really, of many a surprised conversationalist.

Not trying to be uncivil, but I'm detecting a very large chip on your shoulder here, and I frankly don't see how I can communicate anything at all with any assurance that it won't automatically be taken in worst possible way and I can only expect hostility in response.

I really don't want to get into that again right now, so carry on.

Considering our recent past, perhaps you will be happier waiting and seeing if this thread goes anywhere, and what other people have to say might be of use or interest to you.

 

[xssve]

Knock yourself out if you really wanna go there.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Oh, Stella! Are you saying those hours we spent giggling together, plotting against all the other girls on the AH were a sham? I thought you were genuine! I'm never going to go out shopping for make-up and high heels with you again! (Runs off weeping)

No, baby, I meant every word of it, I swear!

Does this mean you won't wear the peaches And Cream lipgloss anymore?

 

[voluptuary_manque]

I think I raised a daughter like you . . . I think. Except that she's entirely straight, so far as she talks to us about such things.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I think I raised a daughter like you . . . I think. Except that she's entirely straight, so far as she talks to us about such things.

Mine is straight, too.

 

[Liar]

Femme, boi, butch, et cetera... And whatever their male counterparts are...

Aren't they just new stereotypes, different molds but molds none the less, that will continue to chafe individuals in the wrong places, when they try to fit into them (or are forced into them by others)? Or are those new labels more, shall we say, elastic in nature?

My admittedly limited experience with queer identities of different kinds had been quite the opposite. At least in a certain context, on a certain "scene", people got so busy questioning old labels, that they forgot to question the new ones they embraced, until they had a strict set of ways to be different that was acceptable. Which kind of goes against the whole idea, no?

Maybe it's an example of COP (community of practice) meltdown and a dysfunctioning local decorum right there and then, and maybe it works better elsewhere. Or maybe it says something about human nature. We like to put things in boxes. Ourself included.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I don't intend, Liar, to advocate a whole new set of stereotypes here. And I'm not really referencing queer community dynamics, per se, I want to talk about the very tendency you speak of-- that of all communities to want to mold individuals into roles.

My reference to "boi" was intended as an example of the way I behaved at a time when there was no label for my behaviour, no model whatsoever, and no social acknowledgement that such a persona was possible in a female.

And that there is now a word that somewhat designates this persona was intended to show that, so far from being a solitary, there is a significant group of women who do not fit the older stereotypes-- and as I now know, an awful lot of them are my age and older. We had never met, so it wasn't anything like a community.

None of us had a label for ourselves. And yes, people do like labels-- they are very reassuring. But I did not hear about "bois" and decide that I would be most comfortable within that label-- I was what I was, even though nobody had a name for it.

 

[impressive]

When I play femme, it's just that... play. I've never been a girly girl. I avoided labels for my sexual identity because, like you said, none fit.

I am a strong, smart, sexually assertive woman who really doesn't give a flying fuck what kind of plumbing her partner has as long as the sparks are there. I can be bottom-ish within the confines of a sexual encounter, if the spirit moves me, but not for very long and such will never define my relationship dynamic.

I know the power of the feminine and can use it to deadly effect if I so choose, but I find such manipulation to be generally repulsive. In my natural habitat, I'm much more boi-ish.

*shrug* I like not having a single term to define me... unless it be "enigma"

 

[Stella_Omega]

When I play femme, it's just that... play. I've never been a girly girl. I avoided labels for my sexual identity because, like you said, none fit.

I am a strong, smart, sexually assertive woman who really doesn't give a flying fuck what kind of plumbing her partner has as long as the sparks are there. I can be bottom-ish within the confines of a sexual encounter, if the spirit moves me, but not for very long and such will never define my relationship dynamic.

I know the power of the feminine and can use it to deadly effect if I so choose, but I find such manipulation to be generally repulsive. In my natural habitat, I'm much more boi-ish.

*shrug* I like not having a single term to define me... unless it be "enigma"

And even that is not a complete description.

 

[3113]

Does this mean you won't wear the peaches And Cream lipgloss anymore?

(sniffle!) Don't you make fun of the Peaches & Cream lipgloss. That was our lipgloss! It's sacred.

 

[cantdog]

What molds? If there are molds for women, what would you want them for?

Maybe I'm too old for this discussion, but it seems like the kind of thing a teenager worries about. Grown people don't worry if they fit a mold or not. Do they?

 

[starrkers]

Another decidedly not girly girl here. My daughter has given up on me - she gets makeup advice from others and if she wants her hair done, gets a friend to do it.

I do own makeup, I even know roughly how to use it properly (more from theatrical training and a great drama teacher than fashion concerns).

I live in jeans, shorts and Tshirts. I own three pairs of high heeled shoes - black courts, black sandals and off white sandals. They get worn maybe half a dozen times a year. I don't actually know where they are at this moment.

Growing up, I wasn't interested in boys, except as buddies. Wasn't interested in girls at all. Never had a "best friend" to share secrets and whispers with. Still don't.

More interested in the workings of the internal combustion engine than colour coordinated clothing and accessories. Unfortunately I'm built for look rather than use - sparrow bone structure and bugger all physical strength.

Guess I'm just an anachronism.

 

[Stella_Omega]

An anachronism which way, Starr? It seems to me that you are an example of the way the anachronistic terms don't work...

 

[voluptuary_manque]

I've got a polo shirt with the classic lines from "A Boy Named Sue" over the pocket.

Big and Grey and Mean and Old


Three out of four ain't bad. Is that enought mould for people or do you require greenish grey fuzz, as well?

 

[CeriseNoire]

Other than "the strange one" title in my family, molds and labels haven't been too important in my life. I consider myself lucky to have been born to my parents. When I was growing up, they were fairly conservative in many ways, they didn't box me into a particular version of femininity. I was encouraged to take interest in my appearance, but I was also expected to be brainy and think for myself. I had tons of Barbies, but it never crossed my mind that I should look like her. Come to think of it, I had lots of "boy" toys as well.

I think the woman I became has a lot to do with that. I put (some) work into what I wear, and I love wearing girly dresses and make myself up. At the same time, I'd rather have a quick and to the point conversation with my man than spend an hour talking about feelings. I hate talking on the phone. I own more shoes than I need.

I guess I'm lucky that I grew up in a time and environment where I was allowed to just be.

 

[Liar]

I don't intend, Liar, to advocate a whole new set of stereotypes here. And I'm not really referencing queer community dynamics, per se, I want to talk about the very tendency you speak of-- that of all communities to want to mold individuals into roles.

Yep, I got that. I just used the queer community as an example. It happens pretty much everywhere, but I thought it was extra obvious there, since it's one that perhaps more than any other is based around the idea of challenging not only the old stereotypes but the very idea of sterotypes.

I've never met a woman who is all sterotype female, nor have I ever met a man who is all stereotype male. Or really, any other label. Not once you scratch the surface. But it's what we do, because the labels are there, we pool and intepret our experiences and imprssions around them. I'm sure that if I just met you, I'd file you into a convenient category, and later discover that I was, as usual, dead wrong.

Urgh, too deep end of the pool for a sunday morning. I'll be back later.

 

[Liar]

Going back to the term "boi"; It did not exist back when I was one. It does exist now, and seems to have moved usage from a tiny subset of lesbians to the queer community in general, and now is showing up in a hetero usage-- and thank goodness, too, because straight women are not all of them feminine femmes! So that should be one example of a new awareness.

Question: How does this hetero usage differ from the old usage of tomboy?

Tomboy is not often a self-chosen nomer (Maybe that's it? A label you own vs a label that was forced upon you?), but in essence, it seems to describe the same type of person, pretty much.

 

[starrkers]

An anachronism which way, Starr? It seems to me that you are an example of the way the anachronistic terms don't work...

Sorry for the delay - Sundays are mayhem here.
Anachronism in that my physique is designed for the era of pretty and useless women doing needlpoint and getting the vapours. Obviously I should've been born into an incredibly wealthy family.
The mind doesn't suit the body and never has. Nothing pisses me off more than knowing how to do something and not having the strength to achieve it. And that happens regularly.
People see the figure and immediately assume I'm brainless. Or trying to steal their boyfriend/husband/SO.

 

[Safe_Bet]

Very nice concept for a thread. Thank you.

Much like Stella, I was born a lesbian. My wife (Safe_Bet) describes me to others as a “Boi” or Soft Butch. I don't particularly care for ANY specific categorization, other than "Person".

What I would like to point out in this posting is the inappropriate assigning of “masculine” traits to strong women. I am a woman who loves another woman. I am NOT a woman who wants to be a man. I am not a man in a woman’s body. I am focused, disciplined and can be mildly aggressive, especially regarding business. I actively defend my wife from much of the harshness in the world.

Because of these traits, I have been described as "masculine". I stridently reject this particular stereotype. I AM a woman. I am also a woman who refuses to be categorized by society so that they can assign arbitrary descriptors to me in an effort to limit who and what I am and can be. (Amy)

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Question: How does this hetero usage differ from the old usage of tomboy?

Tomboy is not often a self-chosen nomer (Maybe that's it? A label you own vs a label that was forced upon you?), but in essence, it seems to describe the same type of person, pretty much.

I don't know about other people, but the term 'tomboy' to me always referred only to children. I never use or have it heard it used to apply to anyone who has entered anything but the very beginnings of puberty.

That being said, I maintain today just as I have for years that my favorite women were all tomboys as little girls. I just love the women that physically active, dirt-and-mud-loving little girls who catch bugs and play softball or some other sport turn into. For those who know Pratchett and Gaimen's Good Omens, Pepper is what I'm referring to. Y'gotta love 'em!