Archives

UnStraightening Lesbian: Removing the Heterosexual Lens: Kate Millett

First up in our next (ongoing) series of Unstraightening Lesbian is the recently departed Radical Feminist Kate Millett. Millett is best known for her sex obsessed (all her works aremuch ado about nothing book Sexual Politics, published in 1970; a huge tenet, gospel, and BIBLE of Radical Feminism past and present.

Millett (she was married to a man for 20 years, mind you) is equally known for her tenets on “CHOOSING” Lesbianism for the sake of sisterhood and the destruction of the family, but I digress.

Sexual Politics was the brain child mental diarrhea of Het female excuses blamed for personal failures/unhappinesses in (Het) Women. In Sexual Politics Millett tried to detach biology from males and females by redirecting real and perceived Het female inequalities toward collective (Het) man-Patriarchy, using a warped version of Marxism lite.

The gist going something like this: (Het) females are conditioned by males/male systems of power to act/function in ways approved of by males/male systems of power and there is little (Het) females can do about it. Therefore, if some of the higher thinking (Het) females (like Millet) raise the consciousness of less conscious (Het) females, together they can challenge these male power systems and smash the Patriarchy! Female roles will be cast off and with the removal of socially conditioned roles, so to will fall the inequalities held in place by constructed sex differences; sexual construction being propped up and maintained by Patriarchy.

 

Millet went about dismantling biological sex differences among males/females by primarily utilizing (homophobic) Robert Stoller and (pro-pedophile) John Money’s THEORY that males and females are RAISED (brains are malleable) masculine/boys/men and feminine/girls/women, they are not BORN that way. So, if the next generation of humans can be raised without the sex roles assigned to males/females, the next generation of females would be inclined to be more equal/equal to that of males.

Millet also proves her case for social construction by use of HOMOPHOBICALLY HETSPLAINING French Gay author Jean Genet/his semi auto-bio novel the Thief’s Journal. Millet says in Sexual Politics on Genet’s novel:

I didn’t leave Millett’s quote from Genet in as it served no purpose for her point, yet interestingly Millett quotes “female figure” where no such phrase exists in the Thief’s Journal. Millett being fully ignorant of Gay male culture, filters Genet’s/Genet’s homo character’s homosexual experiences through her own privileged heterocentric lens.

Millett, with Het privilege intact, accuses Genet of grotesquely mimicking the very Heterosexual roles SHE herself despises! Millett cannot see/comprehend Homosexual Genet or his Homosexual characters outside of HER Heterosexual framework! That Sexual Politics was such a huge seller isn’t at all surprising, Millett’s Homophobia runs rampant in this book, a book published at a time when Gays and Lesbians were just beginning to make headlines and headway, and if the world isn’t ready for that today, imagine nearly 50 years ago.

Millett goes on to say that Homosexuality is a:

Painstaking exegesis of the barbarian vassalage of the sexual orders, the power structure of ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ as revealed by a homosexual, criminal world that mimics with brutal frankness the bourgeois heterosexual society . . . . In this way, the explication of the homosexual code becomes a satire on the heterosexual one.”

In a NUT shell, Millett is Homophobically saying that through Homosexuality’s mock version of Heterosexual roles, Heterosexuals can better see where Heterosexuality shines and where it needs polishing.

Around the time of Sexual Politics, Kate Millett’s sister visited Kate and her husband Fumio in New York and arrived to this:

Homosexuality to Millett being a role like the masculine and feminine roles assigned to Heterosexuals via Patriarchy; by casting off the role of Heterosexuality Millett and other Feminists could simply put on Homosexuality:

As bizarre as it sounds, and was, Kate Millett/Radical Feminists believed/preached (through a warped/flipped-on-its-head act of sublimation) that by taking up Homosexuality (I know, right!) they could destroy Patriarchy!

In other words, rather than directly confronting the issues they had with males (singular/collective), in typical Het female form, they (and with Het privilege) redefined/used/abused and colonized Homosexuality (Lesbian), through which they could then fuel their collective anger (real or imagined) at men.

And obviously another upshot of gay liberation for Millett and her fuck friends, creating more fuck friends! Because marriage (heterosexuality) according to the married Millett was:

But when Kate Millett embarked on one of her many excursions into her Radical Feminist CONSTRUCTED lesbian relationships, Millett speaks of her female partner not unlike how Radical Feminists squall at men for doing:

Millett also wanted to shout NO when at a conference at Columbia University she was publicly confronted head on about whether or not she was a Lesbian:

Private lezziefied fun fuckfests for Millett was one thing, but publicly calling herself a Lesbian was “unspeakable” (without pressure) and “shameful”:

An orgy with her husband and another Woman, how very NOT Lesbian! In her book Sita, Millett says of her sexual relationship with Sita:

Millett admits she was not sexually fulfilled until/unless a woman dominated her/her pussy in the same way as did a man. But Millett’s sexual relationship with the older, multiple-times-married-with-children Sita didn’t last beyond the sex. Millett’s selfish disdain and jealousy for Sita’s children and her occasional male lovers ended their affair and Sita’s life through suicide.

Between juggling Radical Feminist conscious raising brainwashing sessions, her husband, multiple (Het) Women, teaching and a multitude of mental breakdowns/forced incarcerations, Millett bought a farm she hoped to make into a Radical Feminist utopia. She also carried on with yet another affair with another (Het) Woman (Sophie Keir), whom she purportedly recently married despite saying this about both Sophie and same-sex marriage:

The RadFem all female farm life also proved a bit much for Kate Millett:

Kate Millett was clearly NOT a good person, NOT a Lesbian, NOT Radical, NOT Feminist and, frankly, NOT all there! Millett shows in her earliest writings a deep connection with SEXologist/pedophile and all around pervert John Money, and regardless of my personal anger at Kate Millett for co-opting Lesbian for her own selfish/sick reasons, what I find most fucking abhorrent about Kate Millett is her promoting PEDOPHILIA! Or rather FEMALE PEDOPHILIA:

Millett’s biggest beef with adult/child sex (after removing exploitation) was legal/moral legislation has always been directed at man/boy and not at all toward grown Het Women having sex with little girls! 

Mental illness threads itself through Radical Feminism creating a most ugly, warped, and demented tapestry. And Kate Millet’s morally bankrupt needle pierced more than just the hearts of Lesbians, because, by publicly advocating sex with children, Millett and ANY and ALL proponents of Kate Millett severed the very head of Humanity!

Dirt and Mrs. Dirt

Are Lesbians Ever Attracted To Men?

Recently, I received the following comment on a post:

“I am definitely a lesbian but have been attracted to men.”

So I thought I would do a post addressing this important question:

Question: Are Lesbians Ever Attracted To Men?

Answer: No!

TheEnd

Image: Pixabay: Michitogo: Creative Commons CC0

Social Media & Covert Narcissism: How NOT To Let A Few Bad Apples Spoil The Whole Pie

I have previously written from a personal perspective about my own experiences/observations regarding covert narcissism and gaslighting, because I have (unfortunately) dealt with many situations involving various people who display covert narcissistic-type traits/features/behaviors, both in real life (starting with my mother) and on social media.

Yesterday, a commenter on my most recent post asked whether I would develop a “cheat sheet” to help identify covertly narcissistic-type traits/features/behaviors when on social media.

Before we go any further, please note that ALL of the following disclaimers apply:

I am speaking as a person with personal experience/observations regarding narcissism (rather than as a psychologist). Furthermore, NOTHING written on this blog is ever intended to be professional advice, nor does anything I write ever substitute for professional advice. If you have any mental health concerns regarding yourself or a loved one, you need to seek professional advice from a licensed psychologist, psychiatrist, or other qualified professional.

The word “narcissist” in this post, as with my previous post, is meant as a descriptor, not as a diagnosis. Please also note that people may exhibit such traits/features/behaviors but may or may not meet the clinical criteria for diagnosis.

Additionally, it would be inappropriate to diagnose anyone over the internet anyway; thus, these posts are simply to describe the possible warning signs of such traits/features/behaviors; NOTHING said on this blog is ever meant as a diagnosis of anybody.

Also, please note that, as necessary with any broad topic, I am speaking in generalities in this post. It is literally impossible to cover every single example, and there will always be “exceptions to the rule”; so the items listed here may not apply to every example.

Additionally, everybody occasionally exhibiting a couple the behaviors listed below is clearly not a narcissist; so please always remember that everyone can have a bad day and do/say something out of character. So: rather than jumping to conclusions based on limited data, it is very important to always look at the whole picture and to consider a person’s behaviors over time and with different people.

The main question always is: Can the person ever admit when she is wrong and/or take responsibility for her part in a situation? If not, that is a BIG warning sign.

Finally, please note that I will be using “she” in this post for convenience, and since my own personal demons are with females who display covert narcissistic traits; but, of course, please keep in mind that both males and females can/do display these traits/features/behavior.

Moving on from my long list of disclaimers, it is important to note that covert narcissism is much trickier to recognize than the more obvious overt variety. When people typically think of narcissism, most people conjure up the overt narcissist: someone who is obviously “full of herself ” ~ the proverbial “show off”; typically very-well-dressed…often even “flashy”.

But: covert narcissists are much less obvious and therefore, they usually fly under the radar. On the surface, the covert narcissist will likely seem to be friendly, modest, perhaps even “plain”/unadorned in appearance/dress, self-effacing, warm, approachable, etc.  However, these impressions are simply a part of an effective facade that serves its purpose well: to prop up their weak egos, by fooling people and garnering attention/support.

Therefore, the covert narcissist can be more insidiously harmful than her overt counterpart: both because it is easier to be ensnared in her web of lies, and because others are very unlikely to ever see her for what she really is.

Now, let’s look at some of the potential warning signs of a covert narcissist on social media ~ keeping in mind, of course, that any of these factors in and of themselves do not necessarily mean the person is a narcissist; that all of these items will not apply to everyone who exhibits narcissistic traits; that the term “narcissist” is used here a descriptor only (not as a diagnosis); and that this list is not meant to be comprehensive:

  • She may be quite popular on social media. She may have a relatively large number of followers who she doesn’t know in real life (but, nonetheless, she often interacts with them as if she does know them);
  • She may have some special status in real life that inflates her sense of importance on social media (for instance, she may be an actor, singer, author, professor, popular blogger or YouTube star, model, athlete, expert in her field, etc. etc. etc.);
  • She may interact with her followers and others regularly on social media in such a way that she seems to be friendly and approachable. However, these interactions are likely to be superficial and/or sometimes even overly-sugary-sweet. (“Good morning, my delicious treat!”; “Good night, my sweet lambikins”…when talking to people she has never met in real life and who she is not romantically involved with);
  • She maintains her friendly, affable facade very well…that is, until she suffers a narcissistic injury and retaliates. The trigger could be anything from someone simply questioning something she said, to someone disagreeing with her, to someone saying something she perceived to be insulting, etc.;
  • When the covert narcissist feels insulted (and it does not matter whether the “insult” was actually intended, or whether it was completely unintentional), she will react by attacking the person who she feels insulted her (who has now become her target);
  • Instead of continuing the discussion in the original thread, she will often quote what was said on her own account, in order to distract from the fact that she is misrepresenting what was said and in order to get support from her followers;
  • She will often take whatever was said out of context and then twist it to make it seem like her target was the aggressor and that she was inexplicably “attacked” out-of-the-blue by the target;
  • By doing the above, she enlists her numerous followers to defend and support her, thereby propping up her weak ego, while simultaneously tearing down the person she perceives as her opponent;
  • Instead of sticking to the original topic, she will often intentionally throw a number of unrelated “red herrings” into the discussion to confuse the issue and derail the discussion; (Or she will allow her supporters to do so on her behalf);
  • When the drama appears to be finally dying down, she intentionally restarts it, both because she needs the attention and she desires continued revenge against her target;
  • She will often stand back quietly and “innocently” as the drama against her opponent unfolds…but her true feelings/motivations are revealed to anyone who pays close enough attention, because she will “like” statements that are personally insulting and/or untrue about her target;
  • She will never back down, nor will she ever admit she is wrong in any way;
  • She will not take any responsibility whatsoever for her part in the disagreement;
  • She will never “meet someone halfway”, so any olive branches offered by the target will be ignored or thrown back in the target’s face;
  • If the target blocks her after many hours of harassment by her supporters, she will likely intentionally mention that fact to her followers, while stating “innocently” that she has absolutely no idea why she got blocked by the target; which then triggers a new round of attacks on her target;
  • She will “hit below the belt”; which means: instead of sticking neutrally to the original topic, she will engage in personal attacks/insults and/or encourage/condone others to do so on her behalf;
  • She may “sweetly” talk down to her target and/or minimize the target’s education or accomplishments or knowledge (or condone her supporters in doing so);
  • She will demonize her opponent(s) and/or encourage others to do so;
  • She may go back and delete all of her own tweets which might make herself look bad (which further makes her target look bad because the history of the conversation is erased, leaving everything out of context);
  • If confronted, she will say that the target is being silly, sensitive, wrong, mistaken, confused, dramatic, etc.;
  • She is dismissive and/or derisive of others’ genuine concerns, no matter how politely those concerns are stated;
  • She will twist/misrepresent whatever is said by her target; in other words, “intentionally misunderstanding” what happened in order to make the target look bad and/or to garner sympathy for herself;
  • If caught in a lie, she will either outright deny that she said it, or will say that she didn’t mean that by it;
  • She may contact her followers/supporters/friends privately to elicit sympathy and to directly or indirectly encourage them to attack on her behalf;
  • She may have multiple “sock puppet” accounts to use as needed for her own behalf;
  • She enjoys shitstorms on social media, even if she says otherwise, because she becomes repeatedly embroiled in them;
  • If she is famous, she may have spoken out publicly about how she has endured/overcome repeated “bullying” on social media;
  • She makes herself seem like a victim in order to emerge victoriously as a hero who has “conquered bullying”;
  • She may intentionally seek out and start disagreements with strangers, in order to to get attention and keep drama going;
  • Her timeline is a testament to her techniques (often “quote tweeting” someone else out of context with a criticism of what was said; and/or the implication that she is a victim; and/or as an invitation for her followers to pile on);
  • She capitalizes on the attention of the arguments on social media by garnering interviews, giving lectures, doing videos, writing papers/posts, and/or utilizing other means to talk about the horrid “bullying” she has endured;
  • When someone points out to her that she is encouraging her multiple supporters to personally insult the target, she denies it totally, even “modestly” denying that she even has multiple supporters, despite clear evidence to the contrary;
  • She says intentionally provocative and/or offensive things to stir up trouble, then pretends to be shocked and dismayed when a brouhaha ensues;
  • She engages in gaslighting techniques (and similar examples), as described in this post;
  • She may falsely imply the target is a racist, a misogynist, sexist, or any other “ist” (or is somehow otherwise wrong/bad) in order to discredit and distract;
  • She may make false accusations/allegations against her target…again, in order to discredit and distract from the real topic, which is her narcissistic injury. (For example, someone once made the false claim that Dirt had “sexually abused” her on Facebook…which is beyond ridiculous and actually not even possible, but, apparently, both logic and truth are completely lost in these bizarre battles).
  • She may call her target such things as “dangerous”, “crazy”, “biased”, “bigoted” (etc.) in order to demean her target’s credibility and to try to stop anybody from listening to anything the target has to say.

My own personal lessons in having dealt with multiple such situations/individuals now on social media are as follows:

I now truly feel the only way for me to deal with covert narcissistic behaviors on social media is to identify and avoid these individuals whenever possible. (Note to self: Do some basic research on the person’s timeline BEFORE jumping into the fray).

If I do find myself embroiled in an argument with someone who I feel is gaslighting me or otherwise not fighting fair (as described above) in the future, I plan to try to remain cordial and extricate myself as soon as possible. (“Try” is the key word in the previous sentence: I do better with this some times more so than others. It is a learning process that I unfortunately keep having to re-learn).

I always hate to do so, but I will block the individual if necessary, as well as any others who are creating drama on her behalf.

I try to always remember: NOBODY CAN WIN AN ARGUMENT WITH A NARCISSIST and everything I say can and will be twisted and used against me.

Here’s my own personal to-do list for future reference when dealing with such individuals in the future, taken from my most recent post entitled A Battle With A Narcissist Is A Losing Battle Indeed:

MyNarcissistRecommendations

Please also read my previous posts on  covert narcissism and gaslighting for further information, background, examples, and recommendations.

Social media has a lot of positives: to stay in touch with family/friends, to reconnect with old friends, to make new friends, to discuss issues, and to exchange ideas with a variety of people.

However, social media also has many negatives: it can become a free-for-all brawl where normal rules of basic decency often don’t seem to apply. People say dreadful things to each other on social media that they would never dream of saying in person. People often show their worst selves on social media; instead of lifting us up, social media often has a tendency to drag us down.

My vow  for the future is to try to not let these relatively few bad apples spoil the whole social media pie. In the future, I vow to try to not let myself be sucked into a vortex of negativity so that I also end up saying things that are not nice. I vow to take a break when social media feels overwhelmingly negative. As a very wise person said to a friend on Twitter recently, “Go rest. They will still be here when you get back.”

The Sadly Predictable Stages of Hetsplaining

Note: Please also see Dirt’s post on the same topic: Lesbians: SEEING the Forest because we are Not Trees

Dirt and I have been attacked on Twitter by hetsplaining straight “feminists so many times now, I have discerned a predictable pattern of behavior which delineates the stages of hetsplaining:

Butt in to a conversation uninvited;

Attack viciously; twist everything being said beyond all recognition; falsely claim we are misogynists, racists, etc.; even sometimes stooping low enough to insult us personally by attacking our appearance, our relationship, etc.;

Rage all out of proportion to the situation; using all emotion with no logic whatsoever;

Block us so we can’t see what they are saying;

Incite others to attack;

Enlist others to continue the drama;

Subtweet about us, knowing we cannot see what is being said to defend ourselves (which is quite cowardly).

(Rinse and repeat ad nauseum with each new wave of straight “feminists” who pick up the gauntlet).

You can remember this sadly predictable pattern of hetsplaining by using the acronym BARBIES. The most recent brouhaha involved a Barbie harpy (see below).

And for just ONE example of how these hetsplaining harpies treat Lesbians who don’t kowtow to their straight-privileged BS, here’s just one of many insulting tweets Dirt and I have been subjected to for simply stating our opinion:

Harpy

And people wonder why I say that Lesbians are on our own…but, seriously, with “feminist allies” like this, who needs enemies?

Do Dirt and I Hate Straight Women?

Since Dirt and I have been speaking out about how Lesbians are different than straight women and how straight females (even many alleged “allies“) and Straightbians harm Lesbians, we have received a lot of feedback which typically boils down to: “Be nice! We need to support our straight sisters! You HATE straight women! Etc.

In fact, I recently accidentally noticed someone on Twitter subtweeting “She (Dirt) hates straight women”. I already addressed it directly with that person, but the incident made me realize that some people seem to actually think that, so I felt I needed to do a specific post on it.

So, here’s the official answer:

NO, DIRT AND I DO NOT HATE STRAIGHT WOMEN.

(Sighing loudly).

NoHate

Image: Pixabay CC0 Public Domain

Pointing out that there are actual differences between straight females and Lesbians beyond who we f**k does NOT equal “hate”.

Pointing out that Lesbians have been harmed in numerous ways by Straightbians and even many straight allies does NOT equal “hate”.

Look, if Dirt and I actually hated straight females, we’d just SAY it. It’s not like we are known for mincing words, is it? 

Falsely claiming that what we are saying equals “hate” is a typical but transparent way to try to dismiss what we are actually saying and to attempt to alienate people from us.

Both Dirt and I have many straight female friends, relatives, and coworkers who we get along with just fine, thank you very much.

The key factor with these relationships is the fact that NONE of these women who we remain close to are pretending to be Lesbian, speaking for Lesbians, lying about Lesbians, appropriating Lesbian, profiting from Lesbians, or in any other way harming Lesbians.

Because if they were doing any of that, we would NOT remain close to them.

Our true friends stay in their lane, and we stay in our lane. They don’t tell us what it’s like to be a Lesbian, and we don’t tell them what it’s like to be straight.

It’s really simple, Sherlock:

Standing up for ourselves and for Lesbian lives/rights is NOT “hate” nor is it inappropriate in any way. What is actually wrong is when straight women attempt to hetsplain Lesbian to actual Lesbians while refusing to listen to us.

Bottom line: Dirt and I do NOT hate straight females, but we do, in fact, hate what is often done to Lesbians by straight females. There’s a HUGE difference between the two, and it would behoove our detractors to learn what that difference is.

Butches, Stripping, and Straightbians…Oh My

For a couple of days now, I have been in a series of heated debates regarding the question of whether Butches would ever be strippers. (Answer: Not just no, but HELL NO).

In response to my statement that the probability of a Butch stripping would be approximately a snowball’s chance in Hell, I received this flippant tweet, presumably to “prove” that Butches do strip:

img_0182

Problem is: The woman depicted here is most certainly NOT Butch, and most likely, she’s not even ANY sort of Lesbian either. This tweeter, along with a plethora of others, incorrectly assume that if any woman cuts her hair short and dons a suit (or any other so-called “male attire”) and simply makes the claim she is Butch, she is magically (POOF!) suddenly Butch.

But it doesn’t work that way. Not even close. Butches are born, not made.  Butch is NOT a performance, a costume, a political stance, or an act, and it is majorly offensive when people appropriate and misrepresent Lesbian lives.

A true Butch would NEVER strip. She would literally die first, and that is NOT an exaggeration.

What gives me the right to make such a broad claim, you ask? Because I am a Femme Lesbian. Because I am married to a Butch, and have known other Butches. Because I have been in the Lesbian community for many, many years now, and have seen so many dykes & Straightbians call themselves Butch when they clearly weren’t. Because I happen to have a lot more knowledge about this topic that most people.

(Yes, I said it, I mean it, and I don’t care if you mistakenly think that is arrogant, because, yes, I do, in fact, know more about this topic than most people).

Anyway, I won’t bore you with giving you a play-by-play of every argumentative hetsplaining tweet or every Straightbian arguing with Lesbians about OUR OWN LIVES. It would take a dissertation to just explain the last couple of days.

But let’s examine one striking example of the sort of ignorance and attitude real Lesbians have to put up with:

Image 2

Let’s examine this snippet. Seemingly out-of-the-blue, a relatively new “feminist” account with 14 followers at the time and a handful of tweets crawls out of some hole to randomly bust my chops?

Hmmmm…it seems likely that this is a familiar troll in a new disguise, but regardless of this person’s true identity, automatically jumping to a racial connotation when race was not even mentioned is an incredibly transparent attempt to derail the actual point (“Butches don’t strip…period.”) by implying I am somehow inexplicably being racist by talking about a Lesbian issue.

Obviously, that idiotic crap doesn’t work with me. “Stick to the topic or shut up” is my motto.

(And, no, there are not any Butches of any race stripping for a living, now or ever).

Moving on to the next ridiculous assertion from our wannabe know-it-all:

Image 4

Okay, so calling me a racist didn’t work, so what does this buffoon do now? Hmmm…Oh, I know, let’s bring RAPE into it! THAT always derails the discussion!

This “rape culture” statement is completely off-topic and makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, so, again, this is an obvious attempt to discredit what we are saying by twisting what we are actually saying to try to make it mean something completely unrecognizable.

This is actually a very common Straightbianfeministploy:

If you have no argument and/or simply don’t understand the topic, it’s time to bring up any of the following to try to derail the conversation:

  • Rape or Rape Culture
  • The Patriarchy
  • The “Trans Cult”
  • Racism
  • Sexism
  • Any other “ism”
  • Discrimination
  • Violence Against Women
  • MRAs
  • Men in dresses “forcing”/”coercing” Lesbians to have sex with them (Not happening)

Well, those tactics may work with some people, but they are certainly not going to work with me or Dirt.

Again, the topic at hand was simple: Butch Lesbians and stripping. This topic has nothing to do with racism, rape, etc.

Back to the point: Do Butches strip?

And the final answer is: Butch Lesbians would never strip, regardless of race, age, audience, era, or circumstance.

The end.

“Straight” To The Point

Over the last several days, Dirt and I have been arguing with straight female “allies” on Twitter over the premise that Lesbians are different.

To make a long story short, not 1, not 2, not 3, but a whole coterie of straight females have tag-teamed us, alternating between telling us to “be nice to our allies“; completely dismissing us; twisting whatever we say; bringing up unrelated topics/issues to try to derail/confuse the discussion; making analogies that make absolutely no sense whatsoever; acting like we are saying something we are not, then being offended by their own incorrect assumptions; trying to make us seem mean/bad/rude/etc.; name-calling; subtweeting; and usually, finally blocking us. Just when one wave disappears into the horizon, a new wave appears. Rinse and repeat.

Here’s the thing: It takes an astonishing amount of straight privilege to argue with Lesbians about OUR OWN LIVES.

These straight women do not know what it is like to be a Lesbian; but much more importantly, their actions of arguing with us ad nauseum proves that they don’t CARE.

I don’t know what it is like to be a man, or a Black person, but you don’t see me telling men or Black people how they “should” feel or denying or arguing with what they say about THEIR OWN EXPERIENCES.

Yet, that is precisely what these straight women are doing. Instead of listening to what we are actually saying about our own Lesbian experience/lives, they are actively attempting to silence us, shame us, twist our words, deny our experiences, and discredit us.

Why? There are likely a number of reasons, depending on the person, including, but not limited to: ignorance, arrogance, straight privilege, fear, reacting with emotion instead of logic, faulty preconceived notions, wanting to keep the incorrect notion alive that “any woman can be a Lesbian”, comprehension difficulties, not wanting to listen, misdirected anger, etc.

Whatever the reason(s), their behavior is completely unacceptable. 

Whether or not people agree with us, Lesbians deserve the same respect and courtesy straight people expect (and routinely get).

People, especially those who purport to be “Lesbian allies, should actually BE allies by listening rather than talking; caring rather than dismissing; remaining open rather than blocking.

And if you fruitcakes cannot do that, you are NOT an ally.

AND you can kindly fuck off.

(Please also read Dirt’s post on the same topic, here).

Image 1

Image: Pixabay: varintorn: CC0 Public Domain