What if…there were no labels?
Diva Magazine, June 2011
Gemma Halsey Imagines A World Where Nobody Labels Their Sexuality
The rejection of labels has become somewhat fashionable of late. Or at least a viable way for an array of celebrities from Lady Gaga to La Roux to Jessie J, to appeal to gay audiences whilst staying under the shade of "I will never label my sexuality, etc”. And you know that when popular culture's current LGBT vanguard, Glee, has jumped on the no labels bandwagon, something is really afoot. For those still unfamiliar with the Santana-Brittany storyline, check out Santana's inimitable response: "I'm not interested in any labels, unless it's on something I shoplift…” It is only later that she reveals her objection to labels stems from a fear of being bullied.
Welcome to a world where the cool response to the once simple question of who you like to sleep with has become a tangle of extremes, ranging from the nonsensical ("I don't like to define myself / sexuality / gender / other but if I did I'd be a monogamous / androgynous / kinky / queer….”) to the easy option of avoidance ("I fall in love with people”). Could it be that traditional labels might actually have their uses? How much of this "no labels” business can be attributed to plain old fear and watered down, self imposed homophobia?
Just Imagine
Let's hypothesize for a moment. What would happen if the labels were ditched altogether? Without labels there would be no clunky categorizations based on reductive identity signposts. We would be judgment, prejudice and cliché free. At first glance, a world of labels might alleviate the pressure lesbians feel to behave "like a lesbian”, which might result in better haircuts and fewer baggy pants. But what happen to culture, community and the vague idea of what being lesbian has been, can be, and could be all about?
Denying Culture
With no "I'm lesbian/bisexual/transgender”, there would have been no revolutionary "lesbian” authors, advocates, anarchists – people who have changed the way the world viewed sexuality. Their hairy legged antics, once shocking and controversial, form the basis of formative rites of passage and visibility for Lesbians the world over. Without labels, could The L World for all of its faults, still have been brought into being, in the full knowledge that its success hinged upon its definition as a lesbian TV show? True, ratings may have been higher. It may have enjoyed a wider audience; older, straighter and more conservative (that is, until the first sex scene between Bette and Tina) but is that what we want? And what better way to undermine the visibility the programme brought, the confidence it instilled and the respect that people felt watching their lives played out on screen than to point the accusing finger and say its use of traditional label was limiting?
Proud to be Gay
Shows, films, personalities who assume their sexuality and wear their chosen labels proudly are doing us all favour. A closeted French pop star I know put it thus: "When I see celebrities who are known to be gay in private or just clearly are and who deny it, that really ****** me off. I'm so proud to be lesbian in my personal life and so frustrated that, because of what I do, it is still considered preferable that I don't. All it takes is for people to admit to what they are, acknowledge and assume the label they have adopted, willingly or not, and things could get better. Nothing puts me off more than when I hear people say; "I don't like to define what I am, I go with the flow…” I'm like, oh come on, that was so last year! Especially when I would do anything to be able to proudly say out loud what I am – a massive lesbian!”
Beyond Labels
In 2009, Absolut Vodka (a brand which must surely be run by gay Swedes at their Stockholm HQ) launched a NO LABELS advertising campaign, aimed specifically at the disaffected no labels fad followers of the LGBT community. The naked bottle, without the label of the logo, was designed to explore the idea that it's what's on the inside that counts, thereby "addressing the problems of bundling different minorities together into one homogenous target group, often referred to as LGBT”. Which is all very nice and contemporary and all, but sometimes I like to know what I'm buying.
Labels do bring preconceptions and offer only vague approximations of who we are. But that is what they are supposed to do. The label "vodka” doesn't tell me how it's distilled or where, what I can mix it with and with how many ice cubes, it doesn't tell me how many calories are in each infinite variation of possible cocktail recipes. But it points me in the right direction, contextualises itself and gives me an idea of what it's all about. It I want more info, it's up to me to open it up, taste, experiment and understand.
It would appear that labels are important. Don't hate labels, hate OTT politically correctness that has us caught up in the details and pushing individual agendas. Accept the labels that help us define ourselves. It's up to us to make them evolve and to become larger than those definitions.
Lesbians speak up – we can't see you
Pink News, 12 July 2011
Name some high-profile gay British men. It can be celebrities, musicians, actors, presenters, and politicians, whomever you wish. Now try and do the same thing with lesbians. The likelihood is that the second list is noticeably smaller. One only has to look at the big screen, the small screen and the media to see that there is a distinct lack of openly gay women in the public eye.
The ones who are are few and far between: Sue Perkins, Clare Balding, Sarah Waters, for example. So why is it that lesbians are so invisible? A quick look through the archives of the Independent on Sunday's Pink List reveals there has never been a female in the top spot of ‘the most influential gay and lesbian people in Britain' rankings. In fact, there are several instances when a woman isn't even in the top ten. For example, in 2007, only Sandi Toksvig makes the top 20 at number 18.
Is it that lesbians purposefully shy away from attention about their personal lives and operate under the radar, or is that they are deterred from being open about their sexuality because of discrimination and dominant social norms? Or do television and the media dictate an agenda that under-represents gay women?
PinkNews.co.uk spoke to four gay women, all with differing profiles and levels of responsibility – the actress and musician Heather Peace, the Conservative MP Margot James, the feminist and journalist Julie Bindel and co-founder of the Ministry of Defence's LGBT group Sandra Docking – and asked why they believe lesbians are lacking visibility in today's society.
"There's no question that lesbians aren't visible enough, especially if you make comparisons with gay men,” says Bindel. "Both in the public eye and in real life. You can go to some towns in England and there are virtually no visible lesbians at all. It's an absolute disgrace.”
Bindel believes it is harder for women to come out because women in general, regardless of sexuality, are more tied to traditional notions of femininity. "There are few women able to be seen as human beings without a specific label,” she says.
Heather Peace, who starred in the BBC3 drama Lip Service, has forged a successful career as an actress and now a musician. She was the only gay actress in the show, despite it being about the lives of a group of lesbians living in Glasgow, and it has brought her a large lesbian following. "I'm under no illusion that before Lip Service, I'd have about 40 people at gigs, and now I'm selling out nationwide tours,” she says.
But being open about her sexuality required courage: "I was never in the closet as such, but I would actively ensure I didn't do the kind of press coverage that would require me to talk about relationships because I didn't want to lie about it, and I also didn't want to talk about my girlfriend because I thought it would affect my acting career.”
"Had there been lots of role models out there living happy, fulfilled lives as out actors then I would absolutely have ‘come out' sooner,” Peace says. "When I look around me now, I still don't see enough role models for young actresses to feel much different than I did all those years ago. And I do worry that I won't be cast in any straight roles.”
Margot James, the Conservative MP for Stourbridge, is one of only three out lesbians in Parliament and the first in the Tory party. She thinks the visibility of gay people does need to improve, but is grateful for progress that has been made in the past decade. "We could certainly do with more lesbians in the public eye, but I would not call myself a crusader on the subject. I probably have a different perspective than younger women – there are so many more openly gay women than when I was younger.
"Yes, compared with the number of men there are less, but I believe that's because there are actually more gay men than women. It is difficult for women, but having said that, a lot of men who are in the public eye hold positions in advertising and media where it has been acceptable for a longer time. It is still very difficult for them too in certain sectors.”
Certain sectors might include traditional organisations, such as the Ministry of Defence. Sandra Docking helped to found the LGBT group for the MoD in late 2004. "The background was that until 2000, the Armed Forces' social code of conduct made LGB service people stay underground as far as their presence within the services were concerned,” she says. "Civilian staff took the same stance – being gay didn't happen at work.”
The purpose of the LGBT group was to raise the profile of LGBT issues within the department, Docking says. However she claims that, despite this, "we don't get a large number of lesbians volunteering for the different roles in the group, apart from the lesbian rep role”. Asked why, she says: "It might be that volunteering is seen differently by men and women. Men see it as a way to network and develop their skills; women see it as a way to get work done but do not see the benefits to themselves – they are discouraged from taking the ‘selfish' view from an early age.”
Docking also believes that it's easier for lesbians to hide their sexualities: "The issue is that lesbians can be invisible if they choose to hide – as the Americans would say – they can ‘pass' for heterosexual. Some of the experience of colleagues who are gay men is that they are visible – they can't pretend to be something they are not and pass for heterosexual.
"This is from their reporting, not from an external assumption. That's an issue about gay men's culture and expression, and also about how people treat gay men. It's also the result of some research I carried out in 2006 on gay men in the MoD. The position had to improve and gay men (generally), stepped forward to take the issue on.”
This agreed lack of visibility of gay and bisexual women translates to a worrying situation for young gay people. With education about sexuality still hugely lacking in British schools and the subject still a taboo in most families, young people look to the media and celebrities to identify their feelings and seek clarification. But a distinct lack of role models means that their exposure to lesbians and bisexual woman is limited, and when it does exist, is often unrealistic and one-dimensional. Butch characters or celebrities, for example, are almost non-existent on the screen, presumably because mainstream society still cannot accept and tolerate women who do not conform to preconceived notions of femininity.
"Society can generally deal better with lesbian storylines on mainstream TV – as long as the actresses playing the roles are straight and therefore the whole thing can still be a heterosexual fantasy,” says Peace. "Generally, mainstream TV doesn't quite ‘get' lesbians.”
As an openly gay actress, does she feel this is a burden? "I do feel a responsibility,” she says. "And it has been a conscious choice for me to accept the responsibility. When I took part in Lip Service, I made the decision to talk openly and answer all questions about my sexuality. I don't want to be part of the problem. I feel good about who I am, and honestly, I've never been happier.
"I think I've genuinely given a lot of gay girls someone to identify with in the public eye. And yes, I think that gay women always want to know who is genuinely gay.”
Bindel says this is a subject that gay women themselves must address and bring awareness to. "The straight people aren't going to fight this battle for us. We've got to stop excusing those who are privileged enough to be in the closet. These are the worst types of positive examples for young people – unless they have a very good reason not to come out and be proud.
"We have to get in and do our bit. We've all got a responsibility. If we're lucky enough to have a job, a partner's support, money, social status, and so on, we've got a responsibility to advocate and speak about it for the sake of others.
"It's down to us who have a bit of clout. We owe it to others like us. Otherwise, how on earth do young people find out about what it's like to be a lesbian? From family? From straight friends? From bigots?”
She also says to conquer the issue, we must acknowledge the influence of feminism. "Women's rights campaigners, some of whom were lesbians, fought for our rights as females – whether it was the right to access abortion, to vote or the right to express ourselves freely in a relationship, gay or otherwise.”
And Bindel says positive examples of lesbians will help this: "We need people who will say ‘it's great to be a lesbian', and not apologise for it. We must say ‘it's great girls, dip your toe in the water and see how wonderful it is' – there's an alternative to the status quo.”
As an MP, James comes under public scrutiny at the best of time, but she maintains that the decision to come out publicly is a difficult one for anybody. "I have sympathy for those in the public eye and those who aren't who don't feel able to come out. And I don't believe in bullying people to come out.”
When asked if she feels like a role model, James says: "I wouldn't do interviews like this if I didn't feel a responsibility. My role is very time-consuming, and covers a lot of areas, such as business, health, employment, etc, and a huge part of my job is working in my constituency. But I do make time to speak about issues for the gay community.”
The MoD's Docking says it's not just role models that are lacking, it's the variety within them. "I think young people may wonder whether there are any older lesbians who can act as role models and also whether they are even relevant to their lives. I was speaking to an older lesbian recently, and she did wonder if we were putting boundaries on ourselves and also, when we get older, we become doubly invisible. It's not just young lesbians who need role models, we need them at every stage of our lives.
"We need them in every walk of life… teachers, nurses, cooks, shop assistants are all lesbians and have legitimate lives. I think the question is why do we want visibility and who needs to be visible – and not just as a young romantic interest in a soap opera to gain viewers.”
Access to positive role models, however, is just one way to promote the visibility of lesbians in both public and private life.
"To overcome the problem, we need to be lesbians in a political way,” Bindel argues. "The only way to change is to get more people who are bothered about and interested in lesbianism to be working in the media and TV. We need more female MPs to bring up women's issues in Parliament.”
Bindel has strong views about what she sees as a lack of political awareness among particularly young lesbians today. "I watched the Candy Bar Girls programme on TV and all I see is just pure hedonism, apolitical airheadedness,” she says. "These women totally don't get it; it's not acceptable. This needs to be a revolution. Just get off your fucking arses and do something political. We haven't won the battle yet. We need to be political about lesbianism.”
Increasing the profile of gay women is a hard task to tackle, says Peace. "But we're talking about legislative changes that need to be made, how we teach our kids in schools, the addition of gay characters in soap operas and dramas, so many things. I think there is a greater problem in how lesbians are dealt with in the press and that comes down to misogyny. I am a woman first and foremost before anything else.”
It appears the issue of visibility is both acknowledged and worrisome for many lesbians. Yet the reasons why and the solutions to tackle the problem are complex. There is no obvious fast-acting remedy to improve visibility, save from imposing quotas into public arenas, which would be as unpopular as it would utterly unlikely.
So instead, we must take a slower, more piecemeal approach; calling for a greater number of women and lesbians in parliament, on television, in power positions and in the public arena. We must use our votes wisely, and we must support those lesbians who are brave enough to be out in public and private, particularly those championing our rights, remembering that it should not be a job left for the few who already carry this responsibility.
Bindel says we need a ‘revolution'. It sounds intangible, but being part of it is easy: just start talking. Talk about being gay, talk about sex, talk about relationships, talk about coming out, talk about our experiences as women and lesbians. We need to normalise the word ‘lesbian', break down myths and stereotypes surrounding sexuality and gender, and above all, try, where possible, to be open and positive, and not be ashamed to be ourselves, regardless of what others might think. Only then, can we and the rest of the world begin to be acknowledged, supported and seen.
Chloe Setter is a freelance writer and sub-editor. Contact: cj_setter@yahoo.co.uk
Please click on this link to view the original article:
Butch lesbians
Are we still confused about sex and gender?
Diva Magazine, 5 July 2011
The philosopher Wittgenstein claimed that there are some categories of things, membership of which does not require any particular property. His example was the category 'games'. Many things fall into the category of games but there isn't a feature common to all of them; they don't all require balls, they aren't all competitive, they don't all involve teams etc… However, he claimed because of certain overlapping characteristics we know well enough what we should define as a game. For example, football, unlike tennis involves teams but they are both played with balls. Tug of war is not played with a ball but involves teams. He called this mapping of characteristics a 'family resemblance'.
This idea of a family resemblance seems to be at work when we make inferences from certain character traits to attributions of male or femaleness. Despairingly often you hear from both heterosexuals and queer women their confusion regarding lesbians either acting or looking 'like men' or dating women who act or look 'like men'. The assumption being, that as having certain 'game-like' characteristics appropriates things to the game-category; having certain masculine properties aligns you with the man-category.
Of course it depends on the definition of 'maleness' the proponents of such statements are working with, which is unfortunately a failure to differentiate between the biological factors that determine 'man' and the social construction that created 'masculinity'.
Historically, femininity has been associated with vanity, submission and domesticity, where as transcendence and strength were considered masculine; women were definitively the former and men the latter. Whilst femininity and masculinity don't have such polarised connotations these days, suggesting certain traits have implications of one sex or another compounds the ridiculous idea that we should be characteristically determined by what's inbetween our legs. One of the things feminists and philosophers have fought against is the idea of an essential female essence, that is, that some characteristics are innately female whilst others are intrinsically male.
Suggesting certain traits equate to ´maleness´ is not only incredibly ignorant and disparaging towards butch women but does womankind a great disservice in general. To illustrate the problem of associations between sex and behaviour, take traditional 'femininity'. For a long time it was associated with, amongst other things, passivity, making it as one feminist pointed out, impossible to be both a successful woman and a successful human being because to aim at one was to miss the other.
The defining feature of both lesbianism and bisexuality is an attraction to women, not an attraction to femininity. In dating a masculine woman you are dating a woman. A butch woman does not look like a man; she looks like a butch woman. Indignant lesbians who claim they date feminine women because they're attracted to 'er, you know, women' would rightly be affronted by the suggestion that they date an effeminate man. Why? Because they are attracted to women and whilst they might like their women feminine, femininity isn't the primary draw. There is nothing even slightly contradictory about a lesbian being attracted to masculinity; butchness does no more make you a man than does a long stride make you a horse.
So as I try and work out the universal property of ´game´, we should happily conclude that masculinity is as appropriate for a man or a woman; or like our games analogy, balls are definitely not necessary
Please click on link to see original article
Being ‘Gaysian'
Written by: Young 'Ricky' Tan
So So Gay, 6 July 2011
Ok, so now I've caught your attention with the smolderingly hot Asian model (who, alas, is not me), I will share my personal experiences of being a gay Asian – a ‘gaysian' – living in the UK. I grew up in a very ‘typical Chinese' household, with strict, ‘traditional' parents – strict as in still imposing a curfew when your child is over 18, and 'traditional' as in believing that ‘bunking one lesson at school is practically a war crime' and ‘a gay child is an unforgivable taboo'.
Confused thoughts and feelings for both girls and boys would compete in my mind throughout my teenage years, before the boys eventually won.
In my experience, there are two main things that Chinese parents want their children to achieve in life: the first is getting a good degree in a reputable subject in order to get a well-paid job that can support them and the parents; the second is marrying another well-educated and well-presented person in order to make lots of little grandchildren and carry on the family line. Unfortunately, being gay, alongside never finding a partner, staying unmarried and divorce are considered shameful or even sinful in the eyes and minds of many Chinese people in older generations.
Needless to say, talks or at least mentions of relationships have always occurred, though rather less frequently than discussions about the importance of my studies. Unsurprisingly, all of those talks and mentions would be of heterosexual relationships. Phrases such as ‘when you get married', ‘when you find a girl' and ‘when you have children' commonly spew forth from my mother's mouth. I have never really responded to those conversation starters or even brought it up myself, so the insignificance of this topic within my family has always been clear – at least for now.
I realised I was gay, or at least bisexual, not long before starting secondary school and before entering my teens; but I never really addressed it properly to myself or close friends until quite a few years later. In those years, I had not weaved myself a sob story; nor I had I lived a particularly exciting life. I managed to get through the majority of my early and mid-teenage years avoiding questions and conversations about the opposite sex and sex itself. Confused thoughts and feelings for both girls and boys would compete in my mind throughout those years, before the boys eventually won.
Gok Wan, one of the UK's few out 'gaysian' celebrities, if not the only one, should be seen as a pioneer for many of us other 'gaysians' in this country
Today the majority of my friends do know, and while many have blabbed to their own parents, I can trust none of them will tell mine. Yet the questions from them and others are still the same: ‘what would your parents do or say if they knew?' and ‘will you ever tell them and if so, how and when?' My answer is fairly simple: I can't say exactly how my parents would react if they did find out, but I can guarantee it would not be a good reaction.
I have survived the past ten years without my parents finding out or questioning me, or, it seems, even suspecting me of being anything other than compliantly straight. Instead, the pressure of my doing well in my studies first has always been at the forefront of their minds. I have always said to people that I will find a way to address, deal and resolve the issue if and when it arises – be it soon or in other five years or so – and while some might find that strange, I feel this unplanned approach suits me fine. If the subject of sexuality and relationships is not stressing my parents right now, then there is no need for me to be worried, meaning I can still live my own personal and private life without their looming and disapproving presence. Of course, it would be amazing if I could strongly believe that my parents (and even entire family) would accept and understand me and life would be no different (or at least no worse than it is now). I'd love to have more confidence, or to feel there was a need to come out to them, but, alas, that is not the case at this point in my life.
Having asked a few of my ‘gaysian' friends about their own experiences and thoughts on the matter, many agreed with or were in the same boat as me – their parents do not know they're gay and they do not want them to know, at least not right now. I know of a few guys who have also managed to get through their lives without their sexuality being detected by their parents, despite its obviousness. I'm moved to ask: are some parents so scared of this taboo being a reality within their own family that they will completely overlook it and not confront it, fearfully waiting for their children to come out to them instead?
I have one ‘gaysian' friend who boldly came out to his parents. His news was met with shock, huge disappointment and even some anger – after a while, however, his parents realised this was not just a phase. Nor could they do anything to change their son, and thankfully they did not go as far as disowning him. It seems they have now accepted it but still do not talk about it, and they have never told friends or other family members. In this case, it seems, respect for their son's sexuality appears to be there, but the shame remains too.
Of course, I understand the risk of being ‘found out' by writing this article for So So Gay and for whatever I may do or write on Facebook or Twitter, but thankfully I canuse privacy settings to conceal my private life from my family on Facebook. Some might not agree with ‘keeping secrets', ‘hiding away' or even outright ‘lying'; but if you honestly did not believe this part of you was any of your family's business, where is the harm? Life for me as a ‘gaysian' feels pretty great right now, aside from always being an object in the eyes of the world's prowling ‘rice queens' (shudder), and I will live it out, however secretly, for as long as I want to, or can
