Tag Archive | Butch

Revisiting The Topic Of Stone Butch

Some time after I wrote Stone Butch, From A Femme Perspective, I received a disgruntled comment that did not get published, because, quite frankly, I was annoyed with the wannabe commenter‘s attitude, plus I didn’t have time at that moment to address her points, but I want to revisit it now.

Here is the annoying comment:

Hi, stone butch here. To be honest your piece made me a little frustrated but I’ll try to be civil in my comment.

My being stone means that during sex, I prefer to give more than I prefer to receive. I receive sometimes but even though I register it as being physically pleasurable, I still prefer giving, and it makes me feel vaguely uncomfortable. It doesn’t have to do with a freakout about me being ‘butch enough’ or anything of the sort – I just enjoy the feeling I get when I’m giving more than the feeling I get when I’m receiving. The whole part about ‘pulling out phrases from the stone butch book’ is condescending and paternalistic. Before I read this article I had no idea that people even said things like that, but I knew that I’d said and thought similar things before of my own accord. How am I being brainwashed when I’d never known anything of stone culture before?

I have always felt this vague sense of emptiness and discomfort when receiving during sex, and it wasn’t until very very recently that I discovered what it was like to be stone, and that the experiences of stone butches very closely matched my own. Assuming that we’re just adopting this label because of external pressure or ‘brainwashing’ is just… wrong.

I’m also uncomfortable with your insisting that femmes should slowly try to work at their butches until they give in to being touched sexually, and that femmes with stone butches will inevitably feel unloved and lonely. As a stone butch I’ve allowed partners to touch me but I’ve never really enjoyed it the way I know I should (not because they weren’t good in bed – they certainly knew what they were doing). To me it just feels like eating something that tastes good or taking a nice nap. I don’t get turned on by the idea of someone touching me sexually. My immediate reaction is discomfort, and it always has been ever since I started having sex (which was when I was like 14, so this isn’t a recent thing).

If femmes are not sexually satisfied by stone butches, then they should find butches who aren’t stone to be with. This is not a dysfunction or fault of the stone butch, it’s just an incompatibility. Believe me, if I could just will myself into not being stone I would have a long time ago, because I realize this makes me undesirable to many femmes and may cause issues in the future. It also makes me enjoy sex less than other butches. But it’s really not a fixable thing for all stone butches.

It also just feels coercive to me. Similar to the rhetoric about how lesbians are just brainwashed and they just need a real man to slowly work at them until they give in and stop being lesbians. If someone doesn’t want to do something sexually, you shouldn’t force it. Period. You shouldn’t use self-pity and ‘boo hoo me I feel lonely and unloved’ to pressure them into giving in to what you want either. If a partner used that on me I’d probably feel like I had no choice but to give in and let them touch me sexually but it’d be completely opposite of what I really wanted. I’d like it, physically, but I’d still feel that sense of discomfort and wrongness. Same thing as a man pressuring a lesbian to sleep with him in my eyes.

That all being said, I think people have different reasons for being stone, so if someone is stone due to past sexual trauma or abuse then they can absolutely become un-stone with therapy and love and trust. Some stone butches may be mildly stone. But many stone people, like me, have had perfectly healthy sex lives and are still stone. I’m assuming your reaction to this will be pity, like ‘oh look another poor brainwashed butch who doesn’t realize that they aren’t stone but actually just have sexual dysfunction,’ but it’s really not necessary. Assuming that you, a femme with no real understanding of what it’s like to be stone, know more about being stone than actual stone people do, is honestly pretty offensive.

That’s my two cents. Kyuo

Here is my belated response:

First of all, and most importantly:

NOTHING…and I repeat, NOTHING…in that post (nor ANYWHERE else on this blog, for that matter) even remotely suggested that anyone should sexually coerce anyone else…FOR ANY REASON, EVER!

But, since that point was apparently unclear to our wannabe commenter, allow me to spell it out more clearly, for the record:

If, at any point, anyone ever says “no”, seems hesitant, seems uncomfortable, and/or otherwise indicates through ANY verbal or nonverbal means that she is uncomfortable with any part of sexual activity…STOP!

To our wannabe commenter: It seems like you really need to go back and actually read the post, because if SEXUAL COERCION is what you came away with, you obviously missed the proverbial boat.

Furthermore, nothing in my post implied that I or any other Femmes are, or ever should be, self-pitying, whiny, or otherwise manipulative in any way. If our wannabe commenter thinks that is how Femmes behave, she clearly is thinking of Straightbians who are pretending to be “femme“.

And the fact that our wannabe commenter could read my post and even remotely THINK that it meant that I was implying that Femmes should “use self-pity and boo hoo me I feel lonely and unloved to pressure” Butches into sex shows a complete and utter lack of reading comprehension and cognitive reasoning skills.

This wannabe commenter is clearly knee-jerking and projecting, rather than reading and actually comprehending.

Moving on: A one-sided sexual relationship will always be just that and only that: ONE-SIDED.

I won’t go into great detail on that point, since I already addressed that in the original post, but bottom line:

If your partner is perfectly, 100% satisfied with being a pillow-princess long-term, YOU ARE DEALING WITH A STRAIGHTBIAN

Furthermore, yes, I agree that a Lesbian always has the right to leave her partner if she is unsatisfied with the relationship for any reason, but our wannabe commenter’s assertion that “If femmes are not sexually satisfied by stone butches, then they should find butches who aren’t stone to be with” is just an overly simplistic cop-out which doesn’t address the true root of the issue, which is:

YES, STONE BUTCH IS A SEXUAL DYSFUNCTION. Being Stone Butch is not simply a “preference”.  A Stone Butch becomes acutely dysphoric at the very thought of having a reciprocal sexual relationship with a loving partner.

The fact that our wannabe commenter incorrectly purports that some people might “become Stone Butch” due to sexual trauma/abuse shows that she doesn’t even understand what Stone Butch really is.

Granted, yes, sexual abuse and trauma can indeed create many issues, including an aversion to sexual contact. But NOBODY “becomes a Stone Butch” due to sexual abuse and trauma. Aversion to sex due to sexual abuse/trauma is a completely different issue, and for a completely different reason, than being Stone Butch. Theoretically, the 2 issues could indeed coexist and interact to create an even bigger issue, but they are NOT the same thing. At all.

Being Stone Butch is created by dysphoria. And shame. Not trauma. Not shyness. Not abuse. Not simply “having a preference”. Etc.

And people aren’t “mildly Stone” ~ Stone means STONE; you either are, or you are not. Of course, general sexual dysfunction does exist on a continuum, but that is not the same thing.

My final point before I let this topic go for now and let our wannabe commenter get back to stewing in her own juices:

To be a Stone Butch, you actually have to be a BUTCH. There are a plethora of screwed-up Straightbian alleged “butches” out there who claim to be “stone” as a mask for their own trauma/abuse/issues.

Based on the whiny, snarky, put-upon, petulant tone of our wannabe commenter, I strongly suspect that she is NOT a real Butch, nor even a Lesbian at all, but, rather, a Straightbian who is play-actinglesbian“/”butch“.

A real Butch wouldn’t “give in” to anything, including sex, if she didn’t want to.

A real Butch would know what it actually means to be Stone Butch.

A real Butch would know that a real Femme does, in fact, have a comprehension of what Stone Butch means. (We may not experience it ourselves personally, but we do recognize it and we also have every right to speak about it. Furthermore, all Lesbians have a certain amount of dysphoria anyway).

A real Butch wouldn’t (deliberately) “misinterpret” my post to assume I was suggesting coercion or manipulation.

A real Butch wouldn’t passive-aggressively throw around pseudo-“feminist” terms like “paternalistic” to express herself, nor would it even occur to a real Butch that what a Lesbian wrote could possibly be “paternalistic”. I guess our wannabe commenter thinks I wrote “in the manner of a father”. Well, I don’t know about your Dad, but my Dad never wrote about Lesbian sex, LOL. Seriously, though, the fact that our wannabe commenter took so much offense at my words that she had to use the tired old Straight/bian trope of comparing us to MEN essentially proves her heterosexuality. A real Butch would not assume another Lesbian was communicating, in any way, “like a man.”

Finally, a real Butch would communicate directly and assertively…in other words, like the actual LESBIAN she is.

In summary, Straightbians, take your hetsplanations elsewhere.

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 

When The Straightbians Go Riding In

I have written before about how being a Lesbian is NOT all about sex.

But it bears repeating, again and again and AGAIN, because straight people make that mistake over and over and OVER…and that includes Straightbians who are pretending to be Lesbians.

In a recent argument, a friend was dismissed by a group of Straightbians and basically told that she needed to “get laid”.

Image 1

Others chimed in with their own tales of “riding butches”; here is one such (too-much-information) comment:

Image 1

First of all, ewwww.

Secondly, the fact that some females have the appalling nerve to dismiss another female’s thoughts/concerns with the heterosexist, DICKsgusting notion that “getting laid” is somehow a magic bullet simply defies belief. (The “you-need-to-get-laid” concept is exactly the kind of riDICKulous, rude, and unwelcome nonsense that men have said to women for the purpose of dismissing their concerns since the beginning of time).

Thirdly, and most importantly for the purposes of this post, this apparent fetishizing of Butches (and even the Straightbians who pretend to be Butches) is a gross and completely inappropriate sexual objectification. Butches (and even the Straightbians who pretend to be Butches) are not sex toys to be used. How would these Straightbians feel if their lovers were talking publicly about “riding” them like a Harley on a bad piece of road? Would they embrace being objectified, used, and depersonalized in such a crass and uncaring way? Maybe…but I doubt it.

The point is that this response is soooooo common for Straightbians. When confronted, many Straightbians typically respond with some sort of sexual comment. Why? Because they think that having sex with a female means they are a Lesbian. They are wrong.

Once more for the recordBEING A LESBIAN IS NOT ALL ABOUT SEX.

Straightbians: You are NOT proving your “Lesbianism” by bragging about how much sex you’ve had with females. In fact, you’re proving instead that you absolutely have no clue what it actually means to be a Lesbian; and you’re proving that you mistakenly think that such hypersexualized playacting is “Lesbian”.

So, keep on riding, ladies, if that is what floats your boat…but don’t dare think that makes you a Lesbian, because it doesn’t. Not in any way, shape, or form.

Oh, and you may want to consider that nobody really gives a crap about your sex life. If your sex life is great, by all means, please enjoy yourself…but just be aware that most people really don’t want to hear the details about it. Just sayin’.

What Straightbians Think “Butch” Means And How They Are Wrong

A very smart friend, Genuine Femme, recently commented on Twitter:

Butch to Straightbians is a term with no meaning beyond fashion choice. And they even get that wrong too!

This quote completely sums up a huge problem with the ongoing bastardization of the meaning of Butch and explains a great deal of the confusion and conflict that Dirt, I, Genuine Femme, and other (REAL) Lesbians experience in trying to reclaim the actual meanings of words from the lying, twisted, claw-like talons of Straightbians.

Here is what Straightbians incorrectly think Butch is:

ANY female (who may be a Lesbian, but quite often is another Straightbian) who does any/all of the following:

  • Cuts her hair short or shaves her head or has a mohawk or has dreadlocks, etc.;
  • Has a copious amount of tattoos and/or piercings and/or body modifications and/or rainbow-colored hair;
  • Wears so-called “men’s” clothes (or even so-called “women’s” clothes that are stereotypically perceived to be “non-feminine”), including, but not limited to, any or all of the following: suits, ties, bow ties, ball caps, trousers, suspenders, Doc Martens, jeans, boxers, vests, cargo pants, leather, etc.;
  • Simply (but incorrectly) calls herself “Butch”;
  • Calls herself “gender nonconforming”, “gender defiant”, “gender deviant”, “gender diverse”, “genderqueer”, “non-binary”, or any other such offensive terms;
  • Incorrectly playacts “Butch” using her own uninformed preconceived notions of “Butch” via her version “acting like a man” (because “male-wannabe” is what she stupidly THINKS “Butch” is!), including, but not limited to, any or all of the following: being hypersexual, typically in a “top”/”Daddy” (ewww!!) sort of way; being domineering or overbearing; swaggering embarrassingly around like Barney Fife on steroids; packing; being sexist (treating her Straightbian like “the little woman” in the relationship); etc.;
  • Eschews femininity” (which is a ridiculous and untrue radfem notion; remember that REAL Lesbians do NOT “eschew feminity”).

The above misconceptions explain how Straightbians (many of whom often incorrectly call themselves “Femmes“) state (with the totally misplaced confidence of the completely ignorant) that “Butches strip” and other such nonsensical, inane claims.

Once again for the numerous seemingly slow-witted Straightbians/others who are perpetuating and/or believing such ridiculousness: 

Many people ask why we continue to insist on calling out the numerous shocking inaccuracies about Butch, Femme, and Lesbian in general. We continue because words have meaning, and the truth matters.

If you find yourself feeling threatened by what we are saying, it’s time to stop and ask yourself why.

Perhaps you already know deep-down, underneath all of your rationalizations and layers of denial, that the life you are living is ONE BIG FAT LIE.

It’s time to face YOUR own demons instead of making demons out of us!

Image 1

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 a flippant, snarky reply from the individual asserting with confidence that “sure, Butches strip all the time”, with what appeared to be a vintage pic of a short-haired stripper (presumably to “prove” that Butches do strip).

Problem is: The woman in the pic she sent was 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 coherent argument and/or simply don’t understand the topic, these people think 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 (of any variety) systematically “coercing” Lesbians into having 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. etc. etc. Obviously.

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.

“Dirt Is A Failed Transman”: The Urban Myth

I have written before, here, about how the urban myth that Dirt is a “failed transman” persists like a demented zombie in a low-budget horror film.

What I didn’t fully address, though, is WHY this myth is so prevalent.  I did mention that the people perpetrating this falsehood are so trapped in their own gender-straitjacketed notions that they simply cannot conceptualize the fact that Dirt is a LESBIAN, nor do they understand that Lesbian is NORMAL, but I didn’t elaborate further on the underlying causes of this tedious rumor.

But the exact WHY is crucial, and needs to be addressed directly.

Therefore, Dirt did her own post on this topic (link here).

I have also copied and pasted her post below, because I strongly feel that it is important to address the root of this prevalent lie.

So, without further ado, here is Dirt’s response, in her own words:

As not simply someone who has written about Lesbians and transition for more than a decade, BUT as a Lesbian writing about Lesbians and transition, to assuage transgender fears and prejudices, in transgender circles the world over it has become urban myth that I myself have “tried to transition” but sadly “failed“. I’m not quite sure how one would fail, apparently the myth making never got beyond fail, but there you have it. “Dirt is a failed transman.”

A little something about myths:

As there is ZERO facts/truths to me having transitioned/detransitioned/tried transitioning/tried and failed transition, what would be the analogy which motivates these falsehoods? Outside of the zillions of petty little self soothing needs/motivations that spring from the individual, there are two prime reasons for the Dirt is a Failed Transman Myth:

  1. Lesbian has been removed from Lesbians.
  2. If Lesbians don’t exist beyond RadFem anyonecanchoosetobealesbian warped ideology and gender nonconforming confirms transgender origins, then normal Lesbians MUST surely be Trans, even if we fail at it.
Myth doesn’t hide things, it distorts them.”

Prior to Transgender ideology being commonplace, Lesbians like myself were often viewed/called and bashed with phases like mannish lesbians, lesbians who want to be men, lesbians who really are men, lesbians who act like men, masculine lesbians to list a few. Insults all couched in the swaddling cozy comfort of Heterosexuality.

But also prior to Trans Trending, even prior to the DSM III, Gays and Lesbians found comfort in finding other Gays and Lesbians. We didnt feel threatened by other Gays and Lesbians, instead for many of us we felt for the first time what it felt like to BE normal! To KNOW we were normal. NORMAL Homosexuals! NOT freaks of nature! NOT sick mother fuckers who shall burn in hell! NOT Gender Non Conforming! And most certainly NOT Transgender!

How do myths get created?

Between un-signifying Lesbian and inventing signifiers for Transgender from the ashes of Lesbian, Transgender has suddenly ALWAYS existed in human history. So much so, the once Lesbian tropes used by Lesbians (and Gays) as both survival instincts and mating instincts alike, are being used to back label historical Gays and Lesbians as Transgenders of history!

In my case, Heterocentric qualifiers/traits like mannish looking, acts like a man, masculine, handsome (rather than cute or beautiful), wears mens clothes, keeps a short or cropped hair cut, passes as a man etc, with Lesbian removed from history and with me being qualified as man/nish BUT also being a biological female—queers special snowflakes/Transgenders of both sexes/Trans cohorts and allies of both sexes conclude that I’m a transgender who failed at transitioning because I remain calling myself by my sex (female)/and my sex’s proper (she/her) pronouns. And from thence, myth!

I’m not a failed transman because I am, I’m a failed transman because some people need me to be.

dirt

So Many Lies, So Little Time

There is so much incorrect, libelous, ludicrous, and/or otherwise whackadoodle information on the internet about Dirt (and, now, by proxy, me) that it would take an entire encyclopedia set to cover it all.

shutterstock_532218352

Image: © 3D_creation; used under license by Shutterstock

For the most part, I ignore such nonsense, but occasionally, an ally will let me know about a comment so preposterous, so laughable, so incredibly goofy that I just have to make fun of it.

This is one of those times.

This little gem has allegedly been posted in multiple places by the same disgruntled individual:

“Lynn Marie Baker (dirt from dirt) writes a sensationalist blog with multiple weekly posts demarcating anti-transgender rants. He writes his posts with the intention to dismantle the constricting Gender Straight Jacket that is binding and gagging the female experience. He writes provocative blog posts that personally shame and ridicule transgender children, transgender adults, and professionals who help transgender people. He purposefully denigrates the individuals by calling them by their birth pronouns and names (if he knows what they are) and proudly claims it is for the benefit of society. If you correct him on pronouns he deletes the comments and claims he will decide what pronouns the individual should be addressed by. In the end, nobody really cares about incorrect pronouns being used, as transgender people aren’t that thin skinned. However, if you mis-pronoun him he becomes quite irate. I choose to call her by him because it is well known in his personal circles that he used to take testosterone himself. Due to his own ambivalence around physical transition he decided to stop taking testosterone and began posting anti-trans videos and blog posts. The ambivalence he feels is common among lesbians in his age range as their identities are deeply rooted in the lesbian community. Originally, his intentions were probably meant to help provide others who are gender variant and feel in-between genders some hope. However, due his own background being raised by fundamentalists he quickly turned into black and white thinking regarding gender expression. His black and white defensive structure is seen throughout his entire blog posts which indicates a long history of trauma. It’s hard to feel sorry for him though due to his ongoing assaultive behaviors towards others. It would be different if his blog posts consisted of general information about transition and he came from a actual do no harm perspective. However, he moves into a position of harm quite quickly as he becomes triggered by those individuals who transition from female to male. It is no surprise that he has been focusing his blog posts primarily on the female to male transgender individuals and personalizing attacks against them. Lynn is cut from the same cloth as Donald Trump. It’s as though they are related. Lynn uses similar rhetoric in making fun of the underserved and those who are the most vulnerable. Transgender people are the most discriminated against population currently in our society and are at the most risk. Mr. Baker goes after the most vulnerable because this is the most vulnerable issue he deals with. Being conflicted about gender. He is in a relationship with a self-proclaimed psychologist. I say this because she refuses to let everyone know her real identity for fear of public assault and harassment. Yet, she joins her husband in abusing vulnerable people to express their joint agendas. Mrs Dirt knows that she upheld an oath to do no harm and that if she really is a psychologist, she is in clear violation of legal and ethical codes of her profession. Hence, she won’t allow her name to be publicized. Their latest agenda is pointing out real lesbians not straightbians. Another internalized conflict projected onto others. They claim that lesbians who have had sex with men, who support transgender people (in any way), and other random idiosyncrasies disqualifies you as a real lesbian. A few months back it appears they were sitting around looking at their bookshelves reminiscing about their dyke days in the 80’s and early 90’s. They looked at all their lesbian literature and realized that their world has changed. Yes, there are more than two choices for gender and yes, some women are bisexual and yes, Queer is a new identity. Sadness quickly turned to rage and they posted a series of posts that denounced women and their sexuality. Describing many iconic writers as fake or claiming that they are pussy pirates stealing money from the lesbian community. This pointless blog series proved that they are more disturbed than thought before. Their obsession with the Arian sisterhood of lesbianism is diabolical. Much like a Nazi who is going around asking for identification to ensure that they are truly one of us is exactly why we have a president like we do today. They have no tolerance for otherness. These two disturbed individuals must criticize and become cruel to those who don’t identify exactly like they do. It must be quite conflictual to be married to a man and yet hold staunchly the notion that you are still lesbian enough. I am not referring to the butch femme dynamic that sparks their attraction but I am addressing Lynn being a man which is much different than actually being a butch lesbian. Although he claims the butch lesbian identity pretty firmly, clearly he has deep rooted conflicts or she wouldn’t be so triggered and reactionary to transgender people. I could care less how he identifies but then again I’m not writing hate blogs about how other people should live their lives. In addition, I am not stalking children to shame them online and encouraging self-hatred. I believe Mr. Dirt should hold onto his own self-hatred and Mrs. Dirt should hold onto her own anxieties about being with a man. This would save the rest of us from enduring a hate blog about how you are the only two lesbians left in the world of your Arian nation lesbian world. It is not our fault you call him daddy at night and he dreams of transition. That’s your own conflict to hold.”

As I have said before, hateful comments always say much more about the person who is commenting than about the intended recipient.

The obvious intention is to insult, discredit, and harm Dirt and myself.  However, what he/she doesn’t realize is that such comments only make him/her look bigoted, angry, petulant, immature, and uninformed.

By deliberating and repeatedly “misgendering” Dirt and by outright lying about BOTH of us, this person’s true colors are revealed (Examples of the odd lies about me in this passage: falsely and absurdly claiming that I have “anxieties about being with a man” and the bizarre comment “call him Daddy at night“):

This individual is a bitter lesbophobic windbag who clearly is threatened by Dirt’s (and/or my) posts…because this response is way above and beyond the level of any sort of “normal” disagreement with what we are saying.

This individual also simply cannot comprehend Lesbianism, except through a very twisted, inaccurate, heterocentric lens.

This person so stuck in his/her own mental “gender straitjacket” that the fact that Dirt and I are both LESBIANS is apparently incomprehensible to him/her; so, instead of understanding (or respecting) our Lesbianism, so he/she has to mind-warp our relationship into a false and perverse heterosexual dynamic. 

Additionally, the incorrect and vitriolic allegations about our Straightbian posts further reveal an alarming lack of understanding of, AND a shocking lack of concern for, Lesbian lives. 

I won’t bother trying to argue with this person or similar homophobes, because it would be a waste of both my time and theirs. People like this don’t care about what either of us is actually saying, and they don’t take the time to try to find out. Instead, they rely on distorted “alternative facts” (also known as outright lies) in a misguided attempt to malign us.

But, just for the record:

Neither Dirt nor I are “abusing vulnerable people” in any way, shape, or form. This sort of bogus claim is commonly used to try to demonize and discredit us.

Dirt posts information which is ALREADY POSTED PUBLICLY ON THE INTERNET.  Here’s a clue: If you don’t want everybody on the internet to see what you are doing/saying, DON’T POST IT PUBLICLY.  Just sayin’.

Dirt never attempted to transition. The fatuous claim that Dirt is a “failed transman” is one of those completely false urban myths that people repeat ad nauseum, without ever bothering to find out if it’s actually true.  So I will say it again: This rumor is not true, and people who are circulating it only make themselves look sadly uninformed.

Neither Dirt nor I are “cut from the same cloth as Trump“, and to claim we are is beyond preposterous.

Our identities have already been revealed. Although the Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld the First Amendment right to speak anonymously, someone made it a mission to reveal my identity.

I am a psychologist…not a “self-proclaimed” one. And I have done nothing whatsoever unethical, and it is both untrue and defamatory to claim that I have. Apparently, this individual is completely unfamiliar with the concepts of free speech and healthy professional debate.

The correct spelling is “Aryan”, not “Arian”, Einstein. Regardless, we’re not Nazis or neo-Nazis, nor are we in any way affiliated with such groups. This analogy is daft.

Neither of our blogs include any sort of “hate speech”. Free speech is very different than “hate speech”, and if someone can read (and comprehend!) our posts, he/she should be able to easily see that what we are saying is NOT “hate speech”.

Neither Dirt nor I would ever advocate for anyone to be harmed or denied basic rights (housing, employment, safety, etc.). 

If anyone doesn’t like anything that either of us has to say, please remember that visiting our blogs is completely voluntary.

Dirt and I have one primary goal: To make the world a better place for Lesbians. You’re either with us in that goal, or you’re against us. (People don’t always have to agree with us on every point, of course, but suffice it to say that the difference is clear between someone who is on our side, versus someone who is trying to undermine us).

Finally, always remember that you are revealing yourself through your angry comments, and in this case, this person reveals him/herself to be someone who thinks he/she knows much more than he/she actually does. The result is unflattering.

Update: 04/06/2017: Edited To Add:

Running along the same veins as the ignorant, yet almost comical, comments above, similar comments were also made on Reddit by someone who has chosen to call him/herself “TheIndependantVote”. (I am not sure whether this person simply cannot spell “independent” or if there is a reason for the misspelling.).

Here is a selection of the quotes from the Reddit comments & my responses:

Quote:

“Mrs. Dirt, I can kind of understand. After all, she is that demographic of lesbian.”

My Response:  Could this person possibly get any more uninformed, offensive, and lesbophobic if they tried?  I truly doubt it.

Quote:

“But Dirt, is more of a mystery to me. Is this a self-hating transman? Is this a butch lesbian who has been called a trans man too much and feels upset about it? Or is this a situation where Dirt’s wife is leading Dirt into ruin?”

My Response:

Again, this person is obviously lesbophobic and uninformed about Lesbians.

This person, like our other prevaricator profiled above, cannot see past their own “gender straitjacket” long enough to see that LESBIAN IS NORMAL.

Whether Butch, Femme, or any other “variety” of Lesbian, we are ALL normal. There’s no “right way” nor “wrong way” to be a Lesbian/female and to assume/say that Dirt is ANY sort of “transman” is not only completely wrong, it’s also erasing Lesbian reality.

And: I am not “leading Dirt into ruin” (LOL!), and I couldn’t even if I tried, because Dirt is a fully functioning adult who is capable of forming her own thoughts and making her own decisions. Healthy adult relationships simply don’t involve anyone being “led into ruin”.

Quote:

“Like it seems like maybe Dirt was on their way toward something else and Mrs. Dirt decided to play some psychological games and abuse what little education it seems she has received. Also, Mrs. Dirt claims to be a psychologist as of at least July 22nd of this year, but some say she hasn’t graduated yet. Is that legal? Also, shouldn’t she get reported to any kind of licensing agency for going against the DSM so recklessly? She is causing real harm to the treatment of others with her behaviour. She’s like an anti-vaxxer in the middle of an outbreak. Seems professionally unethical and intentionally harmful.”

My Response:

“What little education” I have had is a Ph.D., cupcake.  I don’t know who is claiming I haven’t graduated yet, but clearly they don’t know what they are talking about. They are making themselves look ignorant by making false claims.

Furthermore, my having an opinion and voicing it is in no way unethical/harmful.

Professionals and researchers disagree and debate civilly all the time about many topics, and we should. Healthy and respectful debate is a vital part of the checks and balances system for any profession.

Once again for the slow learners: I have NOT said or done anything unethical and/or harmful, nor would I ever, and for this individual to imply that I did/would is flat-out libelous.

Furthermore, if this individual and others are so convinced of the absolute correctness of their dogma, why are they so terribly threatened by any questioning/disagreement whatsoever?

Think about it: People who are completely secure in their views/beliefs/choices are not so desperately threatened by questioning/disagreement that they resort to making baseless accusations and posting asinine insults. So the fact that this person did so tells us all we need to know.