But for all the discussion about dresses and butch/femme – a personal note. When I knew Barbara in the 1970′s, it was long after any “rules” about proper demonstration attire had expired. And Barbara still wore dresses in the summer. Her comment was: they were a lot cooler! Leave it to Barbara to not get caught up in ANY politically correct stance!

In retrospect, the Independence Square picketers in the photo do appear somewhat “dorky”. But I understand why they dressed to appear mainstream. I dressed “dorky” when I taught school in New York in the Sixties but changed into my dyke clothes the minute I got home from school. What’s now considered “dorky” was called “Ivy League” The style made a comeback as “Preppy” in the Eighties.

My straight Ivy-League outfit for teaching included a wool plaid skirt and jacket or jumper worn with a buttoned-down collar Oxford cloth shirt (minus the necktie). After school each day, the shirt remained, but the suit was replaced by chinos or cords and a boy’s V-neck sweater. Desert boots completed the outfit. It was definitely more comfortable than woolen women’s suits.

Before moving to the East Coast from Portland, OR in 1962, I occasionally would wear a real femmy outfit to gay bars just for the shock value. I got a big kick out of watching the reactions from my drinking buddies.

After returning to Portland in 1972, I worked for nearly 25 years in an outpatient alcohol program. When one of the therapists started a gay and lesbian therapy group, she had me draft a letter to Barbara Gittings about advice and resources to use in starting the group. I identified myself to Barbara in the letter, and got a nice one back from her with lots of useful information. I was able to come out to the therapist this way, and she later invited me to sit in with the group.

My last encounter with Ms. Gittings was by e-mail several years ago in connection with her and Kay’s participation in an MCC General Conference in Texas. One of my housemates is MCC clergy and attended the conference, so I had her introduce herself to Barbara and Kay. My housemate returned with photos of herself posing with these two wonderful women.

Sally C., Portland, Oregon

> Hugh might do the cooking, and actually wear an apron
> while he’s at it, but he also chops the firewood, repairs
> the hot-water heater, and could tear off my arm with no
> more effort than it takes to uproot a dandelion. Does
> that make him the murderer, or do the homemade curtains
> reduce him to the level of the child molester?

He tangentially brings up an interesting point, of how folks also have an expectation that if you DO generally express yourself more towards one pole of the gender spectrum (as with me as a femme and my beloved as a TG butch), that you’re regulated to all of the gender stereotypes that go along with your gender identity. That’s why both of us enjoy the mindfuck when folks are caught by surprise that yes, I’m the one who does most of the cooking and Partner is the one who generally takes out the trash, but (just one example out of many) I’m also the one who is the more skilled house renovator, while Partner is the one who chose to become a mother the “old fashioned” way since it was back in the pre-turkeybaster days.

So it’s not just that gender expression and gender identity isn’t a binary system, it’s not even a linear system on a straight (hehe) “1-10″ scale; it’s more of a three or even four dimensional spectrum.

Bottom line is that we are who we are, and honestly even though many of us choose self-expressive words that make us feel good about ourselves or to help others to better understand who we really are, none of us belong in a box.

(that said, Partner just declared, after hearing what I just wrote, that I’m femme in the streets, femme in the sheets, and stone-butch in the workshop. How’s THAT for boxing me in!! I prefer to refer to myself as a “power tool slut” thank you very much. ::rolling eyes::)

So thanks.

For a seemingly more humorous look at “roles”, from a gay male perspective that is not overtly political except, on retrospect, his portrayal of the incurions of race and class on the perception of gender roles is likely not accidental after all, check out David Sedaris’s little piece in this week’s New Yorker. (Yeah, his sister Amy is funnier.)
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/070219fa_fact_sedaris

But what happened as we segued through the predominantly lesbian feminist (pre-”Lipstick lesbians”, “gender queers”, etc.) is that those of us whose gender expression (even once stripped of patriarchal or lesbian societies’ expectations of us) was truly feminine with a natural attraction to those with a more masculine gender expression and vice/versa, were truly marginalized, and our interests and desires were at best deeply misunderstood as “role playing” (no, I’m finally just being ME) or selling out to patriarchal society’s expectations (when in fact if I sold myself out at any point it was to lesbian society’s expectations of me).

I think the butch/femme dynamic and those of us whose natural expressions of who we are is as butch or femme is still often misunderstood and still sometimes deeply critisized, but at least there is now dialog and a much greater acceptance than there was 2-3 decades ago.

Maggie, I mistook your meaning… I’m with ya regarding binaries! Although I think recognizing and playing with multiple identities is my preferred tactic rather than trying to get “beyond definitions”, if that’s what you’re suggesting.

When attempting to chuck the whole mess, whatever arises after the chucking will still, very likely, be formed in relation to the mess. And not knowing where one’s identity materials come from can be dangerous, it seems to me.

Hence some of my interest in deducing the various origins of femme and butch. And yup, my particular diatribe needed specific time periods, culture n’ ethnicities, classes. Thus the need for footnotes – a)Zami, b) Stone Butch Blues, c)Boots of Leather, Slippers of Gold, d)uh… Joan Nestle’s stuff…

More briefly, I think that the `crucible’ of the primary, widest-held-as-definative meanings of femme and butch mostly came out of the struggle of ideas between “THEM”, as you put it, and what I’ll call queer communities, of working and middle classes, which mostly congealed after WWII.

Whew, this is a good conversation, thank you. I apologize for when I’m opaque, folks. And if I may, warm bolstering vibes to Maggie Jochild in your personal life strife.

Arguing about the boxes and their origin is beside the point except to an individual trying to unlock the lies inside her head. Real societal change will mean chucking the whole mess and allowing the next generation freedom of self-definition. Which, honestly, I see very few people doing right now. Identity politics is just as bad as the Right in believing we have the Truth. (A particularly American cultural trait arising from our Christian values of judgment, gospel, salvation and conversion.)

It’s great to be having this conversation. Especially this week, with what I’m trying to deal with in my personal life…you have no idea.

Pam Issyvoo, I scored a perfect Androgyne on that test. For what it’s worth. So many of the questions didn’t have an option that would cover “What I’d do if I wasn’t fucking crippled, you jerk”.