Archives

Are We The Only Lesbians In The World?

I wish we had a nickel every time someone made a dismissive, derisive, and untrue comment implying that Dirt, myself, and/or a specific friend of oursthink that we are the only Lesbians in the world” because of our outspokenness about Straightbians. We could all retire in comfort if only someone would pay us for even a small portion of the utter nonsense spread about us.

So, I thought I would do a post addressing this specific, nonsensical, and completely irrational (yet shockingly common!) comment.

Question: Do we think we are the only Lesbians in the world?

Answer: No.

Let’s all just take a minute to really think about this claim: If we actually did think that we were the only Lesbians, there would be absolutely no need to write to/for/about Lesbians. We would just talk amongst ourselves and save ourselves a bunch of time and trouble, now wouldn’t we? (Duh!).

This message has been brought to you on behalf of my ongoing “Just Say No To Saying Ignorant Crap on Twitter” campaign. You’re welcome.

The Aftermath of Avital Ronell: When The True Homophobia Of “Queer” Is Revealed

I always say that if you look closely enough, people’s true colors will eventually be revealed, and that fact has been recently demonstrated very clearly (and queerly!) in the aftermath of the Avital Ronell debacle. One has to look no further than “Ms. Queer Theory” herself, Judith Butler, to see the startling (and, yes, ironic) homophobia that is always lurking underneath the guise of “Queer“. This ever-present, underlying homophobia always rears its disgusting head whenever gay men and/or Lesbians assert our boundaries and our rights to our own homosexual lives/names.

It is, for example, quite revealing that Butler chose to defend herqueer” (NOT LESBIAN!!!!) friend/colleague, Avital Ronell, against the proven-true accusations of sexual harassment of a gay man, while questioning the gay man’s motives and character. Although Butler subsequently issued an “apology when she faced the consequences of her own actions, it was too little, too late, too fake, and too self-serving to make a difference.

Heads-Up Homosexuals: “Queers” and all who support Queer Theory rhetoric and the never-ending, increasingly ridiculous “LGBTQQIP2SAA+++++++” acronym are NOT us, they are NOT our friends, and they are NOT our allies. It is WAY past time to get the L out and get the G out, and get back to the basics of focusing on the rights/lives of ACTUAL homosexuals and leave the rest of the acronym to stew in their own toxic juices.

The following are Dirt’s posts regarding the Ronell fiasco and its aftermath:

First post:

How do you defend a Sexual Harasser? Just ask Dr. Judith Butler:

In lieu of a full post at this time (I WILL be posting one), I did none the less want to address a smidge of the absolute nutfuckery going on in academia, particularly Judith Butler’s leap before she looked defense of NYU’s queer (and by queer I mean strangeprof Avital Ronell.

Queer BFFs

In May of this year Judith Butler sent a letter to NYU president and provost, which she had already previously solicited for signatures to hundreds of academics around the globe regarding a sexual harassment case (that at this point unbeknownst to Butler her buddy Avital Ronell had been found guilty).

I leave readers with Judith Butler’s letter in conjunction with some of the many many many many many many many many many (did I say many?) psycho nutfuck statements made by Prof Ronell and related quotes:

Dear President Hamilton and Provost Fleming,

            We write as long-term colleagues of Professor Avital Ronell who has been under investigation by the Title IX offices at New York University.  Although we have no access to the confidential dossier
(Side Note: Because who needs access to pesky facts when we have Prof Ronell’s less than sound mind and flamboyant character as validation?)

we have all worked for many years in close proximity to Professor Ronell and accumulated collectively years of experience to support our view of her capacity as teacher and a scholar, but also as someone who has served as Chair of both the Departments of German and Comparative Literature at New York University.  We have all seen her relationship with students,

 “When I was a graduate student in the NYU German department, both she and ********* tormented students, postdocs, and staff with their narcissistic personality disorders, their choleric fits, and yes, their sexual harassment.” (from Facebook post of former NYU student)

and some of us know the individual who has waged this malicious campaign against her.  We wish to communicate first in the clearest terms our profound an enduring admiration for Professor Ronell whose mentorship of students

 “I now need to tell her I  love her, meet her on weekends for ‘fun’ and  am completely dispossessed of anything that is (or was) my life…” (Reitman re: Ronell)

 has been no less than remarkable over many years. We deplore the damage that this legal proceeding causes her, and seek to register in clear terms our objection to any judgment against her.  We hold that the allegations against her do not constitute actual evidence, 

 “Hi my darling Nimrod, I am a bit weepy and confused, a normal  aftermath I suppose, and also a response to the sepa ration from you …  But I will try to gain some ground with a visit to shrinky – winky and see if I can’t develop another kind of report for you! …So many kisses for my guardian angel.” (Ronell to Reitman)

 but rather support the view that malicious intention has animated and sustained this legal nightmare.

As you know, Professor Ronell has changed the course of German Studies, Comparative Literature, and the field of philosophy and literature over the years of her teaching, writing, and service.  

  “…I was crying when I did not hear back from you. It was a hard  night, but I’m pulling together….” (Ronell to Reitman)

She is responsible for building the field of literary studies at New York University, but also throughout Europe as a result of her brilliant scholarship and spirit of intellectual generosity.  

  “…I forgot to tell you how much and how deeply and how  importantly and how eternally how seriously I love you … I loved our  time together today. It was beautiful, it was gorgeous. It was a  blessing. You ’ re a blessing. And I want  to affirm it and celebrate it and  you and tell you how much you mean to me, how fortunate I feel…”(Ronell to Reitman)

Her students now teach at leading research institutions in the US, France, and Germany, and her intellectual influence is felt 

 My most adored one, dear Nimrod, … When for instance you said the  other day that you felt that we spoke enough, or even a lot, on the  phone, the incommensurateness of my demand began to dawn on me,  and I thought I realized that you were asking that I dial it down. Very  reasonably. … There was a time when you said I had limitless calling  privileges (a lovely fantasy for me, part of internal dream machine,  which I thought I had translated and kept moderate)…” (Ronell to Reitman)

throughout the humanities, including media and technology studies, feminist theory, and comparative literary study.   There is arguably no more important figure in literary studies at New York University than Avital Ronell whose intellectual power 

  “Loving you downtown and all around the town!” (Ronell to Reitman)

and fierce commitment to students 

 My sweet delight, dear Nimrod,  … I miss you strongly! … I will hold  you close to my heart silently, as I once did, and just listen to your  intimate rhythm, heart, heart, your breathing, heart, heart. I liked  when you would drift off and I could lose myself in your soft breathing.  I’m not sure you remember, because, well, you had drifted off. I asked  for those moments to last forever!…” (Ronell to Reitman)

and colleagues has established her as an exemplary intellectual and mentor throughout the academy.  As you know, she is the Jacques Derrida Chair of Philosophy 

Ronell began an affair with Derrida’s son Pierre while she was staying with the family for the Christmas holidays in 1979, when she was 27 and Pierre was 16. They moved in together the following year (after Pierre’s graduation from high school)

at the European Graduate School and she was recently given the award of Chevalier of Arts and Letters by the French government. 
We testify to the grace, 

“Most  cherished…Cock~erspaniel” (Ronell to Reitman)

the keen wit, 

  “I wish I could kidnap you…Baby, let me massage your feet…” (Ronell to Reitman)

 and the intellectual commitment of Professor Ronell 

 Now lets cuddle like cubs” (Ronell to Reitman)

  and ask that she be accorded the dignity rightly deserved by someone of her international standing and reputation. 

“…get your ass back home, darling …I am sorry I ever let you go!” (Ronell to Reitman)

 If she were to be terminated or relieved of her duties, the injustice would be widely recognized and opposed.  The ensuing loss for the humanities, for New York University, and for intellectual life 

 did you find your  phallus?” (Ronell to Reitman)

during these times would be no less than enormous and would rightly invite widespread and intense public scrutiny.   We ask that you approach this material with a clear understanding of the long history of her thoughtful and successive mentorship, 

“My dearest Nimrod, … I am deeply sorry when I fail at distance, at  least sometimes (but not always) and that I suffer your absence with  such inelegance. I hope you can continue to have and hold compassion  and not feel a downturn in our tremendous closeness at all times, … I  simply wanted to talk to you. You had told me that we would do so  quite a lot: I didn’t realize this was  something very hard for me to  calibrate and assimilate…” (Ronell to Reitman)

the singular brilliance of this intellectual, the international reputation she has rightly earned as a stellar scholar in her field, 

 “…didn’t mean to sound desperate. If you need space it’s OK, just tell Me what’s right for you. I can’t figure it out without your help and Insight and prompts!” (Ronell to Reitman)

her enduring commitments to the university, and the illuminated world she has brought to your campus where colleagues and students thrive in her company and under her guidance.  

 “You look gorgeous; Couldn’t keep my eyes off you!” (Ronell to Reitman)

She deserves a fair hearing, one that expresses respect, dignity, and human solicitude in addition to our enduring admiration.”

Conclusion of 11-month Title IX Investigation: Ronell was found by NYU to have physically and verbally sexually harassed Reitman over a sustained period of time. 

Sincerly,

Judith Butler et al

Second post:

Academic Circle Jerk: Judith Butler; Avital Ronell; J Jack Halberstam; Antu Sorainen:

While not the post intended next, due to the un-fucking-believable levels of Homophobia, this is my next post.

In relation to my last post regarding Judith Butler‘s warped love letter to NYU, crusading for the safe return of sexual harasser Avital Ronell, it seems Butler has gone all fickle toward Ronell (mostly because a rightful shitstorm blew her way, as well as Butler realising Ronell’s personal emails/phone calls to Butler regarding the situation, were flat out lies)! That being the case, Butler has issued an apology letter, of sorts (she’s praying for a get-out-of-jail-free-card-she does NOT deserve one!):

 To the Editor:
I can only speak for myself since the signatories of the letter addressed to the NYU administration regarding the sexual harassment charges brought against Avital Ronell are not a group with a single view, and different authors helped to craft the draft version of the letter that appeared online without our consent (“Battle Over Alleged Harassment Escalates as Former Graduate Student Sues Professor and NYU,”The Chronicle, August 16). When the signatories learned that termination of employment for Ronell was under consideration by NYU, we were bewildered by the severity of this possible sanction. We understood she was accused (“We hold that the allegations against her do not constitute actual evidence, but rather support the view that malicious intention”…Butler took a sexual predictor’s word over evidence that existed BUT which she did not possess) of conducting a “romantic friendship” and that her emails had been scrutinized for evidence of a sexual relationship.
Our aim was not to defend her actions — we did not have the case in hand — but to oppose the termination of her employment as a punishment. (Meaning, Butler and crew regardless of Ronell’s academic iniquities didnt/dont believe Ronell should have been harshly punished-a simple writing on the blackboard I was a bad girl ten times would suffice.) Such a punishment seemed unfair given the findings as we understood them. In hindsight, those of us who sought to defend Ronell against termination surely ought to have been more fully informed of the situation if we were going to make an intervention. (Not so loosely translates to Ronell fucking LIED to me about her sexually harassing a Gay man for years!) 

Moreover, the letter was written in haste (ya think?!) and the following are my current regrets about it. First, we ought not to have attributed motives to the complainant, even though some signatories (namely Judith Butler!) had strong views on this matter. The claims of sexual harassment have too often been dismissed by discrediting the complainant, (by people like Butler!) and that nefarious tactic has stopped legitimate claims from going forward and exacerbated the injustice. When and where such a claim proves to be illegitimate, it should be demonstrated on the basis of the evidence alone. (Really? No shit!)

Second, we should not have used language that implied that Ronell’s status and reputation earn her differential treatment of any kind. Status ought to have no bearing on the adjudication of sexual harassment. (Butler makes perfectly clear though, it DOES make a difference!) All faculty should be treated the same under Title IX protocols, that is, subject to the same rules and, where justified, sanctions.
Immediately after the confidential draft letter was published online, I was in direct communication with the MLA officers (the executive director, the president and the first vice president) to apologize (Ass kissing and boot licking, NOT because Butler had regrets BUT because Butler fucked up!) for the listing of my position within the organization after my name. I acknowledged that I should not have allowed the MLA affiliation to go forward with my name. I expressed regret to the MLA officers and staff, and my colleagues accepted my apology. I extend that same apology to MLA members.
We all make errors in life and in work. (The destruction of a person’s career/livelihood before its even begun isnt a fucking simple “error”, its a fucking homophobic travesty!) The task is to acknowledge them, as I hope I have, and to see what they can teach us as we move forward.
Judith Butler
Maxine Elliot Professor in the Department of Comparative Literature and the Program of Critical Theory
University of California at Berkeley

But Butler’s ass-kissing apology letter isn’t solely what this post is about, this post is about the sheer clear homophobia that the Ronell/Reitman injustice is displaying by feminist academics across the globe. (All screencaps below were public at the time of my capping them).

Witness the HOMOPHOBIC Het hissy fit from STRAIGHTBIAN  academic (Professor at Columbia UniversityJudith (jack) Halberstam’s Facebook:

 

Judy, its been made perfectly clear Butler’s ethics are subject to use ONLY when fearing the higher powers that be.

Perloff correctly clarifies Judy’s warped version of events — and crickets. Nobody fucks with MP!

rightfully angry GAY man makes some point blank statements and per usual whenever a Gay man or a Lesbian speak, Het women are there to call him (us) out for being…wait for it…wait for it….MACHO! Wow! That sure told him, they thought, as well as disproved his spot the fuck on points! NOT!

Mr. Hass nails Judith Butler’s motives and actions exactly; victim-blamed-victim-shamed-tried to influence a Title IX investigation!  After Mr. Hass, and his rightful reaction to Homophobia is ignored (by feminists), and his correct summation of events attacked (by feminists) and the truth he states repeatedly are dismissed (by feminists), a by now VERY angry Mr Hass says regarding Butler’s position “fire this homophobic anti-male cunt“. Mr Hass edits out cunt (although personally I wouldn’t have as its a more than adequate term under the circumstance (cunt meaning: Insulting term of address for people who are stupid, irritating or ridiculous”). But of course where feminists of any sort are concerned, Mr. Hass and his correct points are reduced to:

Calling Judith Butler an “anti-male cunt” isn’t the actual definition of misogyny”, and where a college feminist professor fails to distinguish between her own personal (and I might add overemotional) feelings against facts, blatant homophobia and a Gay man’s anger over ignored Homophobia by Het women, Halberstam should also be fired!

But Judy Halberstam’s hissy fit doesn’t stop there, nor stop with Judy Halberstam:

Antu is as Heterosexual and Homophobic as Judy Halberstam and equally incapable of using reason/facts over Het female emotionalism. Antu’s hysterics pinball her from Halberstam/Ronell to that which has absolutely nothing to do with the case at hand (Avital Ronell was found GUILTY of sexual harassment!). Antu prefers to ignore the actual case, the actual information contained in the case and prefers to (when she isn’t too busy) share good links, i.e. Homophobic feminist links that paint Homophobic sexual harassers as saints and Homosexuals as demons! Antu’s ravings spawn from another Judy Halberstam maddened tirades: 

If Halberstam thinks Butler has ethics, I say again, Halbertsam has NO right to teach, period! Halbertsam’s blind allegiance to her own Homophobia and that of Homophobic cunts (people who are stupid, irritating or ridiculous) is proof positive she and anyone who support Homophobia in any form have no business working with the public, at…fucking…all!

Avital Ronell’s sexual harassment of a Gay man AND the reaction by other (mostly) female/feminist academics and the like, have made it perfectly clear just how far Homosexuals, Homosexual rights, Homosexuals right to equality and how accepting Heterosexuals are of (real biological) Homosexuals have come (Spoiler: NOT VERY FAR):

  1. Homosexuals DO NOT MATTER!
  2. Homosexual rights DO NOT MATTER!
  3. Homosexuals personal boundaries DO NOT MATTER!
  4. Homosexual equality DOES NOT MATTER!
  5. Believing the word of a Homosexual over that of a Heterosexual Harasser DOES NOT MATTER!
  6. Homosexual documentation of Heterosexual harassment DOES NOT MATTER!
  7. Homosexual relationships DO NOT merit the same legitimacy as Heterosexual relationships!
  8. The feelings of Homosexuals over that of Heterosexuals DO NOT MATTER!
  9. Homosexuality IS a slum for warped Heterosexual women to lounge, play, feel special and garner a career!
  10. Homosexuals lives, experiences, narratives and shared biology DOES NOT MATTER!

UnStraightening Lesbian: Removing the Heterosexual Lens: Julie Bindel

Note: This is the latest in the ongoing Unstraightening Lesbian series, originally posted here.

Last up in this group of unSTRAIGHTening Lesbian is Julie Bindel, a Radical Feminist/journalist. Like Julie’s idol Sheila Jeffreys, we could literally use her quotes without comment and her Heterosexuality would (does) speaks for itself. BUT, not commenting on her Homophobia/Homosexual hatred (which she’s made a near career out of) would be a disservice to  actual Homosexuals/Lesbians.

Since Bindel seems to love to hear herself talk, the quotes used for this post will come directly from interviews and an article written by Bindel alone, as stated above, nothing else was needed:

From an interview Bindel gave in 2015 to Feminist Current; when asked about how she became involved in the women’s movement, Bindel says:

Like many RadFems we have unSTRAIGHTened, Bindel too despised (es) actual Lesbians and feared (being called)/calling herself a Lesbian because she did not want to be perceived the way SHE views actual Lesbians, i.e. too direct/too mannish/too brash/too ugly/too dykey etc. According to her, she would not have even called herself a lesbian had she not been called one by a group of boys when she was 17 (or 16 or 15 or ?…because her being “outed” is subject to change depending on her mood?).

Being outed or coming out is another interesting RadFem experience. Because Bindel/RadFems are Heterosexual females, it is only through putting themselves in visibly intimate (not necessarily sexual) relations with other Het females or by actually shouting from rooftops that they are lesbian does anyone SEE them as Lesbian. By coming out themselves, these types of STRAIGHTBIANS can at least control how society views them (not with disgust like we are viewed). More on this later….

Another Heterosexual tell in this quote is Bindel saying that once she was outed she had a CHOICE to marry a man/have babies/work a shit job etc (clearly Bindel’s classism and anti-feminism against other women who marry, have children and work a random job to help support the family they love is not a valid position), none of that has EVER been a choice for Lesbians, because Lesbian brain function isnt designed toward males or babies!

The above is from further into the interview and as you can read, Bindel’s HOMOPHOBIA and classism of whom SHE perceives to be “bar-dykes” are over the fucking top! I suspect the only self-loathing she perceived came from herself. Again Bindel didn’t want to be viewed as a Lesbian UNLESS she could be seen as being radical and brave. The Lesbian sperm and Lesbian egg that meet to create a Lesbian life doesn’t do so for glory, its simple biology and luck of the draw. Living a lie isn’t radical or brave, but this is a lie RadFems deceive themselves with routinely.

The next few quotes comes from another interview Bindel did in 2015 in RadFem Collective:

Lying about your very nature and having copious amounts of sex with copious amounts of women isn’t political and it most certainly is NOT Lesbian! This is reminiscent of American political lesbians” STRAIGHTBIANS who boasted of the daisy chains of Het female lovers they had all across America! Is it any wonder why Homosexuals are perceived to be so sex obsessed!  The Heterosexuals like Bindel calling themselves some form of Homosexual are the sex obsessed! And not that I truly care what the religious right thinks about me/Lesbians, but I/we DO care when what they (voters) think/ the images they hold of us, have been driven by fucked up HETEROSEXUAL women! Like trying to adopt a rescue CAT and my wife and I are asked where we sleep and refused said cat for being sick/immoral, or worse refused the right to rent a home for the same reasons and those reasons exist NOT because of ANYTHING any Lesbian has done BUT because of the warped Heterosexuality of fucked up STRAIGHTBIANS (political lesbians), THAT FUCKING MATTERS!

No person born Homosexual can help it, that isnt an excuse, its pure biology and were it not for idiot Heterosexuals, it would be common sense! Bindel’s ignorance and hatred of Homosexual men is excessive and bleeds into many other interviews/writings. One has to wonder has she ever met a gay man. I read this and a few other things from Bindel to my brother and his husband and they were as perplexed as they were shocked and disgusted by her ignorance and Homophobia. I can only presume Bindel has read too much Califia/Rubin, two other STRAIGHTBIANS Julie; you notice those things when you’re actually a Dyke!

This quote is purely for the shits and giggles, name me ONE Lesbian who in the HISTORY of Lesbians EVER asked another Lesbian if she had orgasms! This is however the nonsense that Het women blather about daily. And RadFems actually ponder why men beat them at nearly everything. Sheesh!

This is the unrealistic dream world many RadFems sadly live in. Heterosexual females will NEVER stop being attracted to men, loving men, putting up with men or putting men first in many cases. Human biology functions today just as it functioned 5000 years ago. Bindel claims to be radical and brave but here she is being as passive as the day is long, passivity being a prime Heterosexual female trait. How are women suppose to use Radical Feminism as a springboard for change when the very women running radical feminist outlets are inactive/passive and impotent? And btw Julie, Lesbians are not passive, we not only say, we do! One more thing if Julie would like to answer, hun why are these campy men ridding around on anything and why a white van as apposed to a red or green or purple one?

From an article Bindel wrote in 2014 in the NewStatesman:

Clearly a RadFem refrain and favourite of Julie’s…

Julie? I’m not sure if this is simply you not bothering to do your homework or a convenient RadFem spin, but the UK GLF; particularly Bob Mellors and Aubrey Walter, took their example from both the US GLF and the US Black Panther Movement. Also the manifesto you site was actually a much later version heavily penned by Het women. Women like you Julie, who were/are ONLY interested in separating biology from Homosexuality so you can be believable/acceptable as something you are not-Lesbian! Readers, this is a prime example of ways in which Radical Feminists have slanted Homosexual history to suit their special needs. Somewhere between Het privilege, pipe dream and abhorrent,abominable, detestable,repugnant,revolting,disreputable,shameful,sordid, vile,reprehensible,reproachable,cowardly,unethical, and unscrupulous lies RadFem principles!

Bindel has never met a Butch, let alone danced with one, as this comment clearly indicates. But I’m sure the STRAIGHTBIANS whom Bindel did dance with whom were calling themselves butch wouldnt be too happy to see (when Julie didnt need a dance partner) what Julie really thinks of them: Butch is so last year. This comes from a past Bindel article she wrote poking fun at a butch cookbook by Lee Lynch, Sue Hardesty and Nel Ward, all three obvious and known STRAIGHTBIANS. Bindel being a STRAIGHTBIAN as well, cannot tell a STRAIGHTBIAN from a Dyke as the above comment and the cited article make clear.

Bindel, along with many many many RadFems are notorious for calling out/calling attention to males whenever they coerce women into having sex with them, yet are completely silent about their decades long coercion of women into leaving their husbands/boyfriends and BECOME lesbians STRAIGHTBIANS! Where their is pressure and propaganda there cannot be choice, and RadFems will be the first to tell you choice is pivotal to feminism! Coercion however? Not feminist at all and most certainly NOT radical!

Jill Johnston Julie? Really? Jill Johnston was an admitted nutcase and Het woman, she was as sane as she was Lesbian, in other words she was neither. As mentioned earlier in this post, STRAIGHTBIANS are never flagged for being Lesbians, instead there has to be a concerted effort to get society (particularly men) to see them (RadFems) not wanting men by being seen as Lesbians! RadFems recruiting (coercing) other Het women into joining their faux lesbian groups wasnt enough, they needed men to SEE them eschewing men by wearing pseudo lesbian pins and staging dyke marches. Like all STRAIGHTBIAN sects, men are ALWAYS at the forefront of STRAIGHTBIAN’s fantasies/fairy tales/preoccupations and politics.

Bindel quoting STRAIGHTBIAN Cynthia Nixon takes the cake, it takes it and shits all over it and smears it on the faces of every Gay and Lesbian who has ever existed and will ever exist!

Julie Bindel despises Gays and Lesbians almost as much as she surely detests herself. Bindel complains about biological males using their power/numbers to don/redefine woman (mansplaining) but sees no problem with doing the same with Lesbian (hetsplaining). Julie Bindel, by her own admission, has never been a Lesbian and therefore cannot be a Lesbian now. She is a privileged Heterosexual woman muddying and uglying Lesbian, giving false testimony to who and what Lesbian is and when WE (actual Lesbians) are refused a job, kicked out of our homes or worse, murdered in the streets Julie Bindel strides on by us like our bloodied bodies are messing up her perfect view (that is if she notices us at all)!

Dirt and Mrs. Dirt

The Top 10 Things Straightbians Say When Told They Are Not Actual Lesbians

1). “Tell that to my wife/girlfriend!”

2). “Well, here’s a pic of me kissing a woman!”

3). “But I’ve dated/had sex with ___ (number of) women!”

4). “It is up to every woman to decide what she wants to ‘identify as’!”

5). “I haven’t been with a man since (insert year)!”

6). “But I love womyn!” or “But I am a womon-identified-womon!”

7). “But I went to Michfest!” (Or a women’s march, or a KD Lang concert, etc.).

8). “As Mary Daly said…” (or Sheila Jeffreys or Kate Millett or Andrea Dworkin or Adrienne Rich or any other famous Straightbian).

9). “Who are you, the Lesbian police?”

10). “But I really like to _______ (insert offensive hypersexual euphemism, usually referring to oral sex).”

News Flash, Straightbians: BEHAVIOR DOES NOT EQUAL ORIENTATION.

It simply does not matter whether you have “eschewed” men (or “eschewed femininity”); whether you have had sex with 1 woman or 4,257,890 women; whether you have had a relationship with a female for 4 minutes or 40 years: NONE of those things makes you a Lesbian.

Being a Lesbian is NOT about what you wear, how you cut your hair, making a political “choice”, “eschewing” men, or who you f*ck (or even whether you f*ck) — nor any other action you take (or don’t take).

You are either born a Lesbian, or you are not one at all.

The End.

UnStraightening Lesbian: Removing the Heterosexual Lens: Sheila Jeffreys

Note: This post is part of our ongoing UnSTRAIGHTening Lesbian series, and was originally posted here.

Next up in our unSTRAIGHTening Lesbian series is Radical (“political lesbian — AKA Het) Feminist Sheila Jeffreys.

Jeffreys was born/raised in England and later moved to Australia, taking up a professorship at the University of Melbourne. Jeffreys is known as much for her criticism of lesbians as she is for her criticism of Transgender ideology. Her friend and RadFem compatriot Julie Bindel said this of Sheila:

 Jeffreys’ introduction to feminist campaigning began in the early 70s when she joined a socialist feminist group (she was later thrown out for suggesting men were to blame for the oppression of women). Sandra McNeill, who met Jeffreys in that group, remembers her as “the Andrea Dworkin of the UK. She was, and still is, seen as an extreme, man-hating feminist”. Dworkin, as it happens, lived with a man, whom in 1998 she married.

Not Jeffreys. She became a lesbian in 1973 because she felt it contradictory to give “her most precious energies to a man” when she was thoroughly committed to a women’s revolution. Six years later, she went further and wrote, with others, a pamphlet entitled Love Your Enemy? The Debate Between Heterosexual Feminism And Political Lesbianism. In it, feminists who sleep with men are described as collaborating with the enemy. It caused a huge ruction in the women’s movement, and is still cited as an example of early separatists “going way too far”.

We do think,” it said, “that all feminists can and should be lesbians. Our definition of a political lesbian is a woman-identified woman who does not fuck men. It does not mean compulsory sexual activity with women.” Although many of the more radical feminists agreed, most went wild at being told they were “counter-revolutionary”.

These few quotes alone, are more than enough proof of Jeffreys’ innate Heterosexuality and her calculating Hetero=privileged co-option of Lesbian for her own selfish purposes, we really do not need to write anything further.

BUT due to Jeffreys making a long career out of Hetsplaining Lesbian and dressing/strapping actual Lesbians in STRAIGHTBIAN frocks, we are!

In the Spinster and her Enemies Jeffreys looks back on early male sexologists like Havelock Ellis to devise how/why early suffragettes/feminists were scared away from girl on girl relationships:

Interestingly, while Ellis fails to truly define real Lesbians (biological), he comes closer to understanding us than Jeffreys EVER has or will. That point aside, Jeffreys like Adrienne Rich or Radfems in general, Homophobically fear/ed being seen as real Lesbians (ugly/mannish per Het norms). Jeffreys/Radfems fears were/are so great as to stop them in their tracks (according to Jeffreys) from “BECOMING”lesbians!

Jeffreys continues, but extends her Homophobia by dragging in Radclyffe Hall’s novel, The Well of Loneliness. Jeffreys cannot see past her own Heterosexuality to realize that Radclyffe and her novel’s characters were also Heterosexuals PLAYING at their Hetero notions of Lesbian.

Jeffreys obsessive hatred of Butch/Femme shows itself through this passage. Jeffreys ignorantly attributes Hall’s warped STRAIGHTBIAN ideas about Butch/Femme as proof of her own STRAIGHTBIAN notions of Butch/Femme.

In a nutshell, the STRAIGHT leading the STRAIGHT about STRAIGHTS who are pretending to be Lesbian.

In Unpacking Queer Politics Jeffreys begins:

Like many RadFems, Jeffreys hatred of men isn’t limited to Het males, she equally despises Gay men and blames her Heterocentric ideas of “lesbian” masculinity/masculine worship for early “lesbian” transitions. One only has to read where Jeffreys got her information from (Halberstam/Devor etc.) to understand where Jeffreys fucked up. If you are going to write about Lesbians in ANY capacity, in order to obtain accurate information, you just might want to get your information from actual Lesbians and not STRAIGHTBIANS. (Duh).

Jeffreys continues her Homophobia by citing more Radfem garbage from one of the BIGGEST Homophobes and known STRAIGHTBIANS-Adrienne Rich!

Again, Jeffreys criticises lesbian role playing by citing the likes of mentally fucked up Heterosexual Women (STRAIGHTBIANS) like Joan Nestle/Sally Munt/Leslea Newman/Judith Halberstam. 

Jeffreys again uses faulty information from warped STRAIGHTBIANS. It is well known at this point that the inappropriately named “lesbian sex wars” were fought by hypersexual STRAIGHTBIANS on one side and prudish STRAIGHTBIANS (like Jeffreys) on the other… actual Lesbians were NEVER involved!

MOST interesting, though, is that Jeffreys (“lesbians who criticized“) admits to being turned on by what SHE calls dominance/submission/sado-society! Jeffreys merely convinces herself that she is better than the Califia’s and Nestle’s because she fights her NATURAL Hetero/sexual urges!

Sheila, honey, Lesbians don’t have urges to be fucked by men regardless of who’s on top!

Jeffreys then cites pro-pedophile STRAIGHTBIAN faghags Gayle Rubin and Pat Califia 
to cast more aspersions on Gay men leading poor little “lesbians” astray! Sorry, Sheila, you would have to be either a complete fucking idiot or STRAIGHT (or both) to know neither of these warped freaks are Lesbians.

Well, Sheila, you got one thing right in your Julia Penelope description(STRAIGHTBIAN), she is from the US!

From Lesbian Heresy Jeffreys continues her warped Homophobic diatribe of STRAIGHTBIAN ROLE PLAYING, or, as she INCORRECTLY deems it: “butch/femme“:

Yes, Sheila, Lesbians actually agree these STRAIGHTBIANS are sick motherfuckers, but what they are most certainly NOT are fucking LESBIANS!

Sheila just about gets it (close, but no cigar…pun intended): Yes, sexual abuse often informs warped Hetero/sexual role playing…among STRAIGHTBIANS!

Sheila fails over and over and OVER to understand the obvious fact that these women are not Lesbians, but, rather, they are Heterosexuals who are role-playing “lesbian“… JUST LIKE SHEILA HERSELF!

Sheila, Carolyn Stack? Really??? Straight therapist giving advice to STRAIGHTBIAN couples about STRAIGHTBIAN sex/lack thereof has fuck all to do with Lesbians again, how???

Sheila, Sheila, Sheila. You’re striking out yet again!  Margaret Nicholls and Joann Loulan might be therapists, they are certainly not Lesbians!

Despite having much to say about Homosexuals, Jeffreys fails miserably to write with any accuracy about Lesbians, Gay men,  or Homosexuality period and the same is true of much her ideas on Transgenders:

Statement From Dirt: “Sorry, Shelia, as a Butch Lesbian who has spent more than a decade documenting female transition (Who is Transitioning), I have yet to find a single Butch Lesbian who has transitioned. While I’m sure there might be some, they are VERY. VERY rare. You, Sheila, again confuse sexually abused STRAIGHTBIANS playing at being male who transition, NOT Lesbian and most certainly NOT Butch!”

“Identified” being the operative word, Sheila! They weren’t “proud lesbians, Sheila….they weren’t Lesbians at all, hence “identifying as gay men” early in their transition. You might want to familiarize yourself with cross-sex hormones and their effects on Hetero/Homo brains.

Holly Devor, Sheila, is a Heterosexual female who transitioned…NOT a Lesbian and therefore NOT a reliable source for Lesbian accuracy!

Because Sheila has no actual knowledge of real Lesbians, she likes to recycle STRAIGHTBIANS who she incorrectly believes are fucked-up sicko Lesbians in effort to give heft to her hatred of STRAIGHTBIANS who are not like her/other Radfems.

Sheila fails to make the simple connection that “CHOOSING to be a lesbian” and “CHOOSING to be a femme” amount to the very same thing:  TOTAL BULLSHIT!

Sheila, clearly Sally here isn’t even a fucking Dyke, yet here you are wholeheartedly taking her word as “Butch Lesbian” truth. Why? Because she states what YOU want to hear! That’s not very good investigative writing ,Sheila, and it’s certainly not “academic research”: any fucking 3rd grader could do a better job!

Heather Findlay isn’t a Lesbian Sheila, therefore, she cannot be a Femme Lesbian! Those responsible for male and female transitions are Homophobes (like you, Sheila) and ALL the Radical Feminists who backed pedophiles like John Money simply because you IGNORANTLY dreamed/hoped gender was/is a mere construct, despite clear evidence to the contrary! Instead of tackling sex-based inequalities head on, Radical Feminists passively blamed gender for all Heterosexual female ills! The plague of Identity Politics jump-roped through the gender loophole left by Radical Feminists.

Sheila Jeffreys, being a STRAIGHTBIAN herself, willfully took at face value the word of all STRAIGHTBIANS, without a care as to how these Lesbian inaccuracies affected actual Lesbians, then or now. Sheila and her ilk succeeded in helping de-sex “gender“, which has led us to where we are today.

Bottom line: It is neither radical nor feminist to hijack “lesbian” for your own selfish gain.

Dirt and Mrs. Dirt 

UnStraightening Lesbian: Removing the Heterosexual Lens: Adrienne Rich

Next up in our unSTRAIGHTening Lesbian series is poet/theorist/Radical Feminist Adrienne Rich.

Adrienne Rich, or ACR as Sylvia Plath referred to her, made her way to “lesbian” (STRAIGHTBIANISM!) via the same route most Radical Feminists did/do; unexpressed voluminous anger for her own poor life choices she readily blamed the men in her life for (father/husband) and collective man (patriarchy). Rich said of her marriage:

I married in part because I knew no better way to disconnect from my first family,” she says. “I wanted what I saw as a full woman’s life, whatever was possible.

Rich marries hoping to escape familial confines/duties only to find herself unhappily in the same trapped place, only worse, with children.

I wanted, then, more than anything, the one thing of which there was never enough: time to think, time to write.”

Rich’s dishonestly in the marriage lead to both her and her husband having affairs:

Shortly thereafter, her husband Alfred Conrad committed suicide:
Apparently she was such a hotty ALL the men in NY wanted a piece of her pie! Umm ~ sure, okay!

After cheating on her husband with both men and women, once her hubby was out of the way/dead, Rich embarked through Radical Feminism, on a mission to remove Lesbian from those gross, vile,  dykey/mannish/wannabe men/act like men/think like men Lezzies SHE incorrectly perceived actual Lesbians to be/look like, and to give Lesbian an air of upper middle class academic redressing, making Lesbian more appealing/palatable and acceptable to greater Feminist groups/women.

Like Radical Feminists in Rich’s day and RadFems now, Rich desperately needed the IDEA of Lesbian to both vent her anger and (mistakenly) use as a means to remove herself from (in her mind) Heterosexuality/Heterocentric confines rendering her helpless/afraid/weak and ineffectual. As a Heterosexual woman, Rich could only access Lesbian through lying:

We will show shortly in Rich’s piece de resistance that Rich (unlike some STRAIGHTBIANS), selfishly planned and executed her lies.

It is precisely codswallop like this that fully seals ANY question (were you to have any) of Rich’s obvious Heterosexuality. Radical Feminists like Rich tell themselves collective man enforces Heterosexual female grooming/dress etc (when actually it is Heterosexual females who both desire/enforce beauty standards) yet cannot explain why Lesbians en masse do not fall prey to the same heterocentric grooming standards.

Lesbians have always existed and have never required validation for our existence. Women, particularly damaged Radical Feminists like Rich spend their lives/careers seeking some sort of warped validation and blame men for not GIVING it to them!

Rich often talks out of both sides of her mouth; on one side she claims her “erotic” feelings for women have been stifled via Patriarchy and on the other side she claims sexual feelings between women are not necessary for qualifying them as Lesbian! Rich ignores, or doesn’t bother to notice, that most Lesbians do not have the luxury of a closet, most Dykes are visibly Lesbian. Lesbian visibility shines for some Lesbians physically and mentally and other Lesbians less physically and more mentally. Either way, Dyke thought processes alone peg us for Lesbian, as any Lesbian can attest to since the advent of the internet. Even online with a genderless name and no image of ourselves, we are often assumed/believed by Hets (usually Het women) to be men!

In Diversity and Variability in Women’s Sexual Identities STRAIGHTBIAN Carla Rappaport Golden said of Rich’s lesbian

Lesbian was problematic for Rich precisely because of the ugly depraved dykey sexually perverted masculinist ideas held by Hetero society/Heterosexuals like Adrienne Rich herself. But Adrienne Rich desperately needed Lesbian because it encompassed (to her) anti maleness, what she didn’t need was the alienating baggage attached to Lesbian. So Rich tried to simultaneously redefine Lesbian for Heterosexual Feminist inclusion while distancing the debauchery attached to Lesbian, thus Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence was born.

Adrienne Rich begins Compulsory Heterosexuality with a Straightbianesque quote from Doris Lessing‘s The Golden Notebook:

This quote not only sets the stage for the rest of Rich’s essay, it IS the stage Rich starred for the rest of her life! A Heterosexual privileged life whereby Rich and Radical Feminists like her, chanted to themselves and in Radical Feminist groups like an incantation; I’m a lesbian! And don’t think for a minute Lesbians missed the degrading walls Doris Lessing sandwiched Lesbian in this passage! This was Rich’s fear, without a man, her only choices were bitternessspinsterhood or Lesbian. Rich CHOSE lesbian, not actual Lesbianism, but a Hetsplained version she could somewhat live with. Like Lessing’s Anna, Rich was too weak to forge a relationship with a man where SHE was willing to or capable of, living her new found consciousness.

Moving on:

Rich believed that Lesbian scholarship was forced into hiding by a patriarchal driven Compulsory Heterosexuality that even mid range Feminism enforced. Rich failed to understand that Lesbian erudition wasn’t (isn’t) quashed or silenced by patriarchy, it wasn’t (isn’t) understood by Heterosexuals, particularly Het women! Rich feared losing academic clout by choosing Lesbian and through RadFem-speak tried to make HER brand of lesbian acceptable to greater Feminism.

Rich assumes Homophobia alone inhabited Feminists (Het women) from trying to coral Het women toward a political lesbianism via feminist theory and why lesbian art/literature etc remained rare. Rich failed to see how her own warped man-hating RadFem agenda was responsible for biological Lesbian invisibility in the arts and elsewhere than was/is Homophobia, because she blinded herself of our existence.

Further in the essay Rich says:

Rich brings up Lesbians being closeted in the workplace but the exact experiences she uses to make her points are the experiences Heterosexual women (like her), claiming to be Lesbians (like her) had with the luxury of being closeted! Most Dykes NEVER have that luxury and most Dykes even if they did would NOT put some fucking job over their entire lives! The only Homophobe here is Adrienne Rich!

Because Rich herself (a Heterosexual woman) didn’t feel or experience blatant Homophobia (why would she?), she ignorantly theorized compulsory heterosexuality was to blame for Feminist silence about Lesbians/Lesbian issues, including the reason Feminists wouldn’t platform Lesbianism as a possible choice against patriarchy/men! Rich claims non Radical Feminists were in collusion WITH patriarchy! Non-Radical Feminists, according to Rich, helped provide patriarchy with pussy, pay, and passion!

Rich found the term Lesbian limiting because Lesbian didn’t include STRAIGHT women like her and because Rich didn’t like the psycho-logical definitions defining Lesbian or the societal connotations coloring Lesbian by Het society. By expanding Lesbian to include all female relationship types, not simply “genital” as Rich crudely puts it, Lesbian wouldn’t be so foul an idea, for women or society. Rich fails to acknowledge the LIMITS, limits based on HER HETEROSEXUALLY driven assumptions about biological Lesbians, that real Lesbianism isn’t defined by pussy licking or KFC pussy (AKA finger licking good). Lesbian was crude, vulgar, plebeian — NOT because it actually was/is — BUT because it was based on Adrienne Rich’s own sick, fucked up, homophobic, warped fucking views of Lesbian!

Being a Lesbian has fuck all to do with taboos or rejecting Heterosexuality, it has ONLY to do with being born physiologically Lesbian! Lesbians aren’t saying no to patriarchy, patriarchy doesn’t factor (collectively) anywhere into a Lesbian’s life. Lesbian past, present and future grew/grow/will grow up without any/little knowledge of Lesbians; fortunately abilities innate to our survival ensure we find each other and are capable of survival even if we don’t. The ONLY destroyers of Lesbian records or histories are Radical Feminists like Adrienne Rich! What has been recorded  as “lesbian” experiences/narratives etc, are instead the experiences/narratives etc of STRAIGHTBIANS like ACR!

Adrienne Rich, in typical Heterosexual fashion, was a little SHIT TON obsessed with genitals/sex.

In other words, Adrienne Rich and Radical Feminism itself are NOT LESBIAN! Bizarrely in this strange (sick) passage Rich twice brings up/equates a child/mother being turned on during infant feeding. I refuse to think past Rich’s statement here, because to do so is just toooooo fucking SICK — and it most certainly is NOT Lesbian!
Adrienne Rich said of women’s diminutiveness art/history in When We Dead Awaken:

Precisely because of STRAIGHTBIANS like Adrienne Rich, Lesbians/Lesbian youth flounder and flail trying to find ourselves in the world. Thanks to the likes of Rich and her warped RadFem ilk, most of the signs and symbols labeled Lesbian are false. They point us right back to female Heterosexual mindset and body that paints us into a corner of dysphoria, reinforcing Lesbian confusion and resulting in a so-called lesbian community made up of Heterosexual women…where Lesbians STILL do not exist.

Adrienne Rich discovered Lesbian in the same way Christopher Columbus discovered America: she ignored those already living here, and those she couldn’t ignore she kindly smothered in blankets of smallpox.

dirt and Mrs Dirt

UnStraightening Lesbian: Removing The Heterosexual Lens: Rita Mae Brown

NOTE: This is the latest in the UnStraightening Lesbian series, originally posted on Dirt’s blog, at this link.

We begin our next set of unSTRAIGHTening Lesbians with the Sneaky Pie Lavender Menace to Lesbians herself Rita Mae Brown. If not familiar with Rita Mae, she was an early element in the Radical Feminist movement after she was more or less removed from Betty Friedan‘s National Organization of Women (NOW). The purported reason Rita Mae was ousted was because she claimed at the time to be a Lesbian. Through this ousting Rita Mae and other Lesbians STRAIGHTBIANS formed the RadFem group Lavender Menace.

But it wasn’t Rita Mae’s libber angst that cloaked her in Lesbianism, it was her first novel Rubyfruit Jungle:

For making the primary point of these posts, (unSTRAIGHTening Lesbian) one really doesn’t have to look beyond Rubyfruit Jungle. The novel rapidly begins with prime character Molly STRAIGHT away focusing on DICK…no, not as in another character…but rather as in a boy the young Molly exploits for profit using his uncircumcised penis in a show and tell: (Ah penis, something every young Dyke wants to see—nope, think again honey!):

From there the novel speeds to Molly having sex with a straight female friend AND then later her straight male cousin Leroy:

A sexual relationship young Molly repeats throughout her cohabitation with cousin Leroy/his family:

Molly struggles to outgrow her illegitimate hick background which both deeply troubles/embarrasses her by heading as soon as she can to the big city; New York. Once there we encounter Molly’s first time at a gay bar with a gay male friend:

It is clear from this moment that it isn’t just the character of Molly who knows nothing about Butch or Femme Lesbians, it is Rita Mae herself who is ignorant for even posing this question at all.

Rita Mae uses her novel to slam other STRAIGHTBIANS dominating the “lesbian” bar scene: damaged Het women who could only see relationships through their own Heterosexual nature: male or female. Mo was no more a Butch than Molly; everything to them, INCLUDING Lesbian, depended solely on what they claimed to be, not what they actually were.

Rita Mae’s snobbish STRAIGHTBIAN Molly places her own warped version of Lesbian (two attractive society approved straight women having sexual relations) above that of fat ugly STRAIGHTBIANS who portray/participate in Heterosexual mimicry.

Moving on:

Rita Mae’s Molly is so disgusted by the purported lesbians she encounters at the bar she jokingly would rather encounter a rapist than entertain the notion of sex with the bar lezzies“! 

Molly apparently thinks herself miles and morals above most, even while she is fucking a small family; mother, father and underage daughter (Thank God they didn’t have any pets!):

Given Molly’s Hetero MALE mimicry (forcing herself on a woman/believing that the woman’s no equals yes) there was no surprise why Betty Friedan could no longer find a place for Rita Mae’s Radical Feminism!

Polina turns the table on Molly and entices her to role play a game Polina and her husband play involving public urinal sex (ewwww):

Molly then moves on to a date with Polina’s husband, Molly figures by fucking Paul she can be closer to Polina, does that sound like any Lesbians you know? No? Me neither!

Molly then moves on to Polina and Paul’s underage (!?!?!?!) daughter:

The dialogue for Alice wanting to have sex with her mother sounds eerily familiar, and Rita Mae’s treatment of incest as “untraumatic” is the ONLY thing “antihuman” here! 

Molly says earlier in the novel of a similar fuckfest:

Rubyfruit Jungle sums up everything that is Lesbian about Rita Mae and Lesbian in the novel: NOTHING!

That didn’t stop Rita Mae from giving advice to young suicidal Gays and Lesbians in her intro to:

 

Homosexuals who aren’t “successful gay people” like Rita Mae, (successful meaning Homosexuals who are Heterosexuals who use Homosexuality for their own perverse uses) dress odd, have “exaggerated mannerisms” and are apparently akin to hookers!

Rita Mae, like Molly from Rubyfruit Jungle, sees Homosexuals and/or STRAIGHTBIANS who are found in gay bars as warped, alcoholics, and obsessed with their Homosexuality (or in the case of STRAIGHTBIANS, obsessed with their claim of Homosexuality).

These people, Rita Mae tells young Gays and Lesbians, are life’s LOSERS!

Rita Mae blatantly states actual Homosexuals can simply cast off our inherent natures and be like her (a pro-incest, polygamous, bisexual)!

Rita Mae Brown, by her own admission (when convenient) cast off calling herself a Lesbian, not just because she wasn’t (and she clearly isn’t!!), but because it was no longer profitable to her now mainstream Heterosexual female audience. Rita Mae hated and still hates labels:

Being a Lesbian isn’t constricting or freeing and it mostly certainly isn’t a sarcophagus burying us alive! Like many STRAIGHTBIANS, Rita Mae donned “Lesbian” like cross dressers don woman, Lesbian for Rita functioned as fetish, financial gain, and fame.

dirt and Mrs. Dirt