Lost Girl

I was going to give this a little bit of time before I decided if this show was pro-gay. I'm halfway into season two and I'm quite happy with it. In fact, this may be one of my favorite shows now, both for the feminist's angle, and for the alternative sexuality angle.




This is the main character. She's so fine. Mmm baby. Her name is Bo.

Here's her fucking a chick!



Yes, the main character is romantically and sexually interested in women, and yes, she does have an established relationship with another women (who is also a recurring character). Not only that, but the sex is awesome. It's not all timid and "we're going to slather our tongues around our faces for the boys watching." There's biting, and ripping the clothes off each other, and implied eating out. It's hot. It's real. And afterwards, there's an emotional reveal that makes the sex really awkward.

Also, here's Bo fucking a dude.




Now, to be honest, I am happier with a fully-formed portrayal of bisexuality than I am with a full-on lesbian. Bisexuals do not get enough love. Bo's certainly getting enough though.

On that note, it is possible that this portrayal could swing too far into stereotype territory, and we'd wind up with someone who is a total equal opportunity slut. However, I'd say that's not the case here. They establish that the reason she is so sexually active is because she's a succubus -a supernatural creature that feeds off sexual energy. They use this to excuse why she's bi, but not explain it. We see another succubus in the series, and she definitely only likes man parts.

And cue the army of half naked men.

The only people Bo has had sex with in this series so far has been people she is romantically interested in (2) and people she's fucked to make them jealous (3). One of those three -or rather, two of those three -was a threesome.

Yep. That just happened.

So what we see established is not a bisexual slut, but an independent, confident polyamorous woman. The only downside is all the jealousy -you have no right getting jealous over someone else's girlfriend when you were banging someone else on the side. But hey, it's an edgy show -if the characters weren't a little hypocritical and damaged, it wouldn't be fun.

More importantly, the way they establish these norms is just gorgeous. No one bats an eye that Bo likes both. In fact, they draw several deliberate parallels to the scenes with Dyson and Lauren (the two main love interests) to make it look like they are on equal footing. The first-time sex for both has many of the same shots -despite lady sex being a little awkward in a hetero position. And then there's this adorable shot.



"Oh. Um hi, not the person I slept with. Uhhhhh. toothpaste?"



"Hi, half naked guy in my bathroom. It's over there."






"Toothpaste?"



"Not this again."


Both main love interests, in different seasons, have the same shot of morning-after -looking around awkwardly for the toothpaste, and being stumbled upon by the roommate. There are subtle differences, but for the most part, it's the exact same scene.

Plus, a good half of the characters are female. The main character is female, and so is the secondary character. And they are all really well developed dramatic characters with skeletons in their closet.

Plus, throughout the show with varying minor characters, they work in a whole spectrum of alternative sexuality. This show is edgy, the characters are amazing, and the sex is tasteful. Very tasteful. Despite the sexual nature it takes on at times, the worst the nudity gets is a silhouetted side-boob nipple, but nothing more graphic than that. This show covers some great ground for sex-positive culture, especially from a feminist perspective.


So you know. There's no surprise that it's Canadian.

Understanding the Transgender Community

I'm cisgender. That means that the gender I identify with matches the one I was given at birth. (pretty much most of the planet is cisgender, but we can discuss the value of actually naming the term later) However, I get asked a lot about issues relating to gender identity. I don't mind these questions at all, and have taken pains to educate myself on the subject anyway, but for a long time, it was very hard for me to explain gender identity to people in a way that makes sense. It doesn't make sense, not unless you are part of the less than 1% of the population that is some sort of gender variant. If you're born cisgender, then understanding that anyone could be anything else is very difficult. Your gender identity is intrinsically tied to your body, and the idea that it could be different just doesn't click.

What I've especially noticed lately is a lot of people who get it to a point. They understand that there are people out there who are trans -after all, let's face it, that's simply a fact, and any rationally-minded individual is going to understand that fact. However, they don't get why you would be that way, or what that means. They know you are, but they still don't understand, and explaining it in terms of gender doesn't ever break that mental block they have.

Unfortunately, this is no way to create a good ally. All this does is silence objection; it doesn't build support. And I know my dear transgender cousins could really use a lot of support. So here it is. The one argument I have found that makes sense when explaining gender to people who are cis. More than any other way of explaining, I've seen cisgender people have an "aha" moment with this. Now, this may be a little triggering, but the reason this argument works is because  it evokes a strong emotional feeling, so I'd really encourage everyone to read it if you can.

Insecurity

Imagine, if you will, the biggest insecurity you have about your body. The one thing you wish you could change. We all have one, whether we admit it or not. It can sound insignificant, but thinking about that part of you makes you feel down on yourself, and nothing you do makes you feel better. It could be something like weight, but probably it's something more permanent like a body part that just doesn't look right, or a scar on your face, or maybe even asthma. Whatever it is, it bothers you a lot, and it's bothered you for a long time.

Now imagine that the very first thing anyone saw when they looked at you was that one thing. When they came over to greet you, they brought up your biggest insecurity. Whenever someone -maybe even a friend -introduced you to someone else, the first thing they told that other person was your biggest insecurity. Whenever you had to apply for a job, you had to disclose your biggest insecurity. In fact, every single government document wants you to share with them your biggest insecurity.

You can't hide it from anyone anywhere. It's not just something you see in the mirror -though that's true too. You can't even go to the bathroom without having your insecurity thrown in your face. 

And this doesn't just happen once. This happens every day. Every single day, someone is going to bring up your insecurity about yourself. Every single day, someone is going to judge you harshly for the very thing you hate about yourself.

What if you could make that stop? What if you could change that one piece of you? You'd be the same person afterwards right? You'd just be happier. More confident. When people called you by name, it reminded you of how much you've overcome. Things would be hard at first, but then you'd get comfortable, and the people around you would forget about your insecurities. They'd see you the way you want to be seen. Wouldn't you give anything, to have an insecurity like that erased?

This is the relationship transgender people have with their gender. It's not just about wanting to change their gender -it's something about themselves that they hate. People who are transgender feel no connection to that part of who they are -and yet with gender-specific bathrooms, male/female categories on government forms, and gendered names and pronouns, they are daily, repeatedly, being reminded of the one thing about themselves they wish to change the most.

This isn't to say that transitioning fixes everything. It doesn't. And it isn't to say that the transgender experience is completely horrible. Everyone has problems. But it certainly helps to have support on your side.

So the next time that you run into an issue relating to the transgender community, or balk at using someone's pronouns, think of this; how would you feel if someone was using your insecurities against you? 

PMS is Bullshit

And unfortunately, I don't mean in the sense that it sucks when you are on it. Sociologists have studied PMS backwards and forwards, and they've concluded that PMS probably isn't biological. The more likely cause is that it's psychosomatic.
Now, I've tried to explain this to half a dozen people this week, and only the men took me on my word, so for you ladies out there, I'm going to explain this slowly. Psychosomatic does NOT mean that there are no symptoms. It does NOT mean that you are not experiencing PMS. All it means is that any symptoms you are experiencing have little to do with biology, and more to do with mentality.
What does it mean if PMS is mental? It means that you thought that those were the symptoms you were supposed to have, so you gave yourself those symptoms.
There are some things that placebo effects can't create. They can't make you bleed, they can't make your organs fail, etc. What they can do is make you nauseous  give you pain in any location, give you rash, give you mood swings, give you sweats etc. There are a lot of things that you wouldn't think a placebo could cause that happen solely because we think they are supposed to happen. PMS is, studies show, more this and less biology.

So now the question (if you haven't already dismissed the premise) is why.
1) In order to be a disorder, it has to be track-able  It has to happen to a statistically significant number of women for the correlation to exist, and it has to have a certain number of symptoms that happen; of those, women must have some, though the symptoms that each experience varies. This is untrue. Studies have found virtually no correlation to time of month and mood reported with PMS specifically, and the list of symptoms attributed to PMS is over 150.

2) In order to be a disorder, it has to effect women of any society. This is untrue. Some societies do not consider PMS to be a disorder, and the women of these societies do not experience menstrual cramps. Furthermore, the symptoms experienced and severity of PMS varies from society to society.

This gives a very good indication already that PMS is in part psychosomatic, if it varies from culture to culture and doesn't have an agreed set of symptoms. However, the more important point is how women perceive PMS versus how it actually affects them.

I learned in a gender class that there was a study done over the course of six months where the women were told to record their mood throughout the day. Then, at the end of the month, they were told to look back and indicate any points where they were particularly moody. The goal was to see if PMS actually did affect mood. What researchers found was that the overall mood during one's menstruation was not likely to be any more emotional than any other part of the month, but women were more likely to look back on this time and attribute a worse mood. In other words, women attributed bad mood to PMS where there was none.

This is one of the tricks our mind plays on us. We see patterns everywhere. So when someone says that PMS will give you mood swings, we look back and say, "Oh I was moodier then wasn't I?" and unfairly attribute any shift in mood to menstruation. Record your own mood, over several months, every day. Mark when you are actually menstruating, and see if there actually is a correlation. I guarantee that for 1-9% of the individuals suffering from PMDD, there will be a negative correlation associated with menstruation. But for the rest of the population, there will not be a statistically significant decrease in mood during that time. That's because things happen all the time that make us sad. It's just life.

Why this is important

If it were just a matter of proving myself right, I wouldn't actually care. I don't really know if I'm right or not; I've just yet to see any factual information that proves me wrong. Everyone who argues with me on this point says, "I experience PMS, therefore PMS is real" and that is NOT an argument. I experience gay sex; that doesn't mean everyone else does. 

But it's not about that. It's really not. It's about the fact that the continued determination that women have to justify PMS as an explanation for their fluctuations in mood is inhibiting the Feminist's Movement. There's all these men out there who are convinced that women would be bad leaders because they can't control their mood. The President is supposed to keep a cool head on his shoulders at all times, and one of the arguments against female leaders is they have menstrual cycles. Their mood is not controlled by their head, but by their body. So what's to say that she won't snap, and react emotionally, and damage international relations or start a war?

Yes, people really believe that. And saying "Leave me alone I'm PMS-ing" only makes it worse, because you are telling every guy out there that yes, you cannot control your mood. Yes, your mood is subjective to biology in the same way that the tides are subjective to the phases of the moon. Yes, you cannot control your emotions, or yourself, and sometimes, you just can't handle life, so you have to curl up with a box of ice cream and a chick flick. Like a raging stereotype. Because God forbid anyone treat you like a normal human being. You're a delicate flower, and you need to be pampered when you're menstruating.

I'm not saying that menstruation is pleasant. But women cannot continue to expect to be seen as men's equals if they insist that once a month, they are going to be moody and cranky and should be taken care of. You are inhibiting yourself for no reason. And if you continue to do so, continue to fight so angrily that "PMS does fucking exist" then you are never going to be seen as anything more than your biology. You are never going to be seen as a person; you are simply going to be seen as a woman. And if a woman is as moody as a teenager, can't control it, and can't stop it... well then. Why are you trying to convince the rest of the world to stop treating you like a child when that's apparently exactly what you want?

What it means to have Privilege

A while back, I got this text from my nephew "So I Just lost a good friend over an argument about LGBT rights."
My first emotion was sorrow, followed closely by guilt. If it weren't for me he wouldn't have lost that friend, because it wouldn't have been such an emotionally charged issue for him. I didn't respond right away, because he'd sent it in the middle of the night, but when I woke up, my sympathy had been replaced with a question:
"Should I tell this straight white male that I'm sorry he lost a friend?"
It took years for anyone to tell me they were sorry my orientation had destroyed friendships, and the apology hadn't come where I wanted to hear it.
Expressing sympathy would have allowed my nephew to feel validated in being upset, but was that actually good in this situation? After all, he was never an educated ally -he was simply an ally because I was his aunt. So this was a good opportunity to point out that he'd just gotten a small taste of what it was like for me to come out. "Welcome to my world."
In the end, my status as his aunt won over my status as a queer woman. Yeah, I might have educated him better with the stern approach, but the point when we stop treating others like human beings is the point where we lose the battle. Had I responded that way, he would have been less likely to come to me in the future. Maybe he would have been a smarter ally, but he would no longer have been my ally.
I just get so sick of this need that minority people seem to have, of wanting to feel powerful over the majority people. I really want us to get to the point where we see each other as individuals.
I have a straight white male middle class atheist roommate -athletic to boot -and it's the best thing to ever happen to me.
In this context, having him as my roommate opened me up to the idea, more than anything else could, that we're people first. The minority status makes us up, but we're people first. He does not think of me as a female friend, or as a gay friend. I'm just his friend. And I accord him the same.
So when given the choice of educating my nephew or sympathizing with him, I chose sympathy. Because I know that were the situations reversed, he'd return in kind.

Gender

I've always considered my gender identity to be two types of female. Because naturally I don't think gender is just male or female. But I don't think it's fair to say that male and female are only one thing. I could be considered gender fluid, or bigender, if not for the fact that my masculine gender is still female in sex. I feel fully comfortable with my genitalia. Always have. The butch me is still a female. She's just dyke-y. And the butch me, to be honest, is much more bisexual.

There's a distinction between the two that I see that's pretty stark. But it's not a distinction that's always there, and that's okay too. Women are by nature very fluid. We have a natural monthly cycle -we're biologically programmed to go with the flow. I'm not saying I put a lot of stock in PMS. But I am saying that women are more ready to change more frequently than men. Hey, maybe it's not true. But it's a truth for me.

So when I think of the most butch me, I think of a valkerie. I think of a strong, powerful, independent woman who needs no one. I think of a vegetarian. I think of someone who can stand strong in a place where no one she knows is near her. I think of a pagan, balancing the dark and the light and at the end of the day, not caring much about gender or seeing much of a gendered world. I think of someone who cares deeply for those around her, but never lets anyone see it, because the butch me isn't allowed to be weak. At the end of the day though, the butch me wants someone to hold on to. She'll never let you see her weak, but she is.

The femme me is a firecracker. She's quick to anger, and quick to defend others. She's fiercely loyal. The only one who's allowed to insult you is me. The femme me likes sex a lot. She'll make out with anyone. But she doesn't like men at all. She thinks men are weak and fragile. You want to roll with this bitch, you have to prove you can tame her. She's not afraid to say how she feels, even if it hurts a little. She likes a little pain with her love. She's emotional and dark and fiesty and she doesn't come out to play much anymore because she gets in trouble a lot. She's also a smoker. And she thinks religion is idealist. And that vegetarianism is pointless. When I go home to my family, she tends to come out a lot because she's got a tougher shell than the butch. And every time I go home, I wind up breaking my vegetarian diet.

Neither of these versions of female is what female is dictated to us as. They share certain traits (like the need to feel secure without others, and more bravado than courage) but at the end of the day, they are different in certain ways. I think it comes from growing up in one place and then moving to some place completely different, with the goal of starting over, but I'm not the same person I once was.

Ever since my first relationship, however, my two identities have been blending together. Butch me fell head over heels for her. But butch me was supposed to be the strong, rational one. Femme me fell head over heels for her in two weeks flat. It took butch me a full month. It's actually fairly rare for my two selves to like the same person. So for my two halves to like the same person is a little strange. It gave them a bridge. And then she broke up with me, and butch me was shattered. I had to rebuild almost from the ground up and since then, there's been a lot more blend between the two.

Sorry, long rant. Tl:dr? Point is, who we are, the people we are attracted to, the gender we identify with, is all subject to change. We are all, as humans, constantly changing and growing all the time. Whether it's a good thing or not is for you to decide.

The L Word

I've already posted five times and still haven't yet talked about where my name came from. So briefly, this is a little bit of the thought process that went with it. 

I prefer to be called a dyke over a lesbian. I know most people hate the word dyke because it’s offensive and blah blah, but I prefer it. I will only ever call myself a lesbian in a scenario in which I think that’s the easier word-choice, and I don’t self-identify that way.

Here’s the thing. I like boys.

This guy? Ooh baby. I could stare at him all day long. He’s a Japanese singer and he makes me all sorts of gooey. He’s got this gorgeous song called “girls, be ambitious” and I’m just like, never stop singing to me please. Now, I know he’s really androgynous. So maybe that doesn’t lose me my gold gay star. But I also get pretty hot for, say… Ryan Reynolds.

Oh Ryan. You’re so yummy. I like your smile. Not the fake one you show to the cameras but the real one where all your teeth are showing and people realize you have an awful cross-bite. Look at him! He’s adorable.

And this is why I don’t like being called a lesbian. I’m not one. Let’s be honest with ourselves. No one is 100% gay or straight and I’m definitely not because I’ve totally had some pretty raunchy dreams starring men. And for years, I would write off little boy crushes by saying, well no one is 100%. But I’m kind of sick of that. Everyone invisibilizes bisexuals. Gays and straights alike, and now gender queers because ‘bi conforms to the gender binary and therefore you should be using the term pan.’ The problem that I have with the term pan is a) no one knows what it is and b) it implies an equal attraction to every gender type across the board and that is also not me. I still have a preference to those who present femme because my first love is women. Don’t even get me started on women.

Whoops how’d that get there? What was I saying? Oh yeah…. Women… yeeeeaaaah… *cough* I mean.

But regardless, I’m still a dyke. Because dyke isn’t just about the fact that you are a woman who likes other women. A dyke is a type of woman. She’s got a bigger body set, and probably shorter hair, and definitely knows how to hold her own, and isn’t afraid of saying slightly misogynistic things about women, because she just loves the female form that much. A dyke is a gender presentation and a preference for women. So that’s why I like the term dyke more. Because I can like boys and still be a dyke. Dyke isn't just about the fact that I sleep with women. It's the gender identity that comes with it. Granted, it's still female, but it's not a feminine female. I would argue that a dyke isn't quite butch enough to be called butch either though. A stone butch is a type of dyke, but there's more dykes than that. 

And to all those people who don't like the term dyke, I'm sorry. But unfortunately you can't please everyone.

Creating Allies: It doesn't just mean teaching straight people

I really have to get this off my chest. I'm queer. But sometimes, I really hate queers. And that isn't internalized homophobia talking. Now before anyone jumps the gun, let me explain completely. I have a very valid reason for feeling that way. My best friend is a straight white male. But he's also an amazing ally, always willing to learn, and almost always stands up against homophobia to his friends, also straight white males a lot of the time. Any time I've told him something is offensive, he's corrected his language and then moved on to correct his friends' language. This is the kind of man I would want standing next to me at my wedding, while I'm getting married to the girl of my dreams, because if it weren't for him, I probably wouldn't have had another straight male friend for the rest of my life. He's such an amazing ally that he actually renewed my faith in straight males all together.

Recently he posted a status saying this: "In my opinion, I really think that when LGBT people (or any minority) hate the 'straight white man' or disengage with them, they lose out on a lot of their support or lose out on seeing people as individuals. I get that a lot of people out there hate, but my dad is a straight, Irish man and he is on your side. I certainly see the LGBT (minority) point of view, but let's remember to not discriminate please (keep in mind I know the difference between racism, and discrimination)."

He posted this because another mutual friend, who is also queer, said he was done with straight white men. Now, in my queer female opinion, when LGBT people hate on straight white men and disengage because they are straight white men, they lose out on a lot of support because now you are seeing that person as a stereotype and not as a person. You shut them out, and of course they are gonna shut you out. If you're ever gonna try and make allies, you need to treat every straight white male as an individual and not just assume that by being straight white males, they automatically don't know what they are talking about.

Granted, the point that a straight white male has no right to tell the minority how to feel about their oppression is totally valid, but the problem is when you assume that his claim is automatically wrong because he doesn't have the right to say it. Because I would readily -and have in the past -make the same claim that if you don't dialogue in a smart way with straight white males, and treat them with respect, you're going to burn bridges. So when I see a queer person then, in response, post this: "Can't really tell a minority how to feel about the majority - check your privilege please." and then this:  http://thefeministhub.tumblr.com/post/2850213187/healthy-cultural-paranoia-and-why-it-is-not-reverse
 and then this:  http://wtfwhiteprivilege.tumblr.com/post/15789319530/so-you-think-you-are-a-good-ally
  and then this:  http://sapphrikah.tumblr.com/post/10572480627 , that, to me, is the worst possible thing you could do. Bear in mind these are all by the same person. Within a matter of minutes of each other.

You could have explained to him in a nice way why you didn't think it was okay. You could have left it at "check your privelege please" and it would have been mildly rude but understandable since you -at that point -were right. You could have come out of this with a stronger, smarter ally. Instead, you have guaranteed that you lost a friend. Because you just accused him -and his father- of being a bad ally, and of being ignorant, and of falling into all the pitfalls of a typical straight white guy, because apparently that's all you can see.

But you know what's the kicker? It doesn't matter if he was in the wrong. What matters is how you handle it. Because regardless of whether we want to or not, at any given time we can be seen as the voice of the community. And this straight white guy who plays football has about fifty other straight white guy friends who just saw you, a queer person, react in a very hateful way to a straight white guy bringing up a queer issue. What are all his friends gonna think, except that you don't want straight white guys as allies? 

So it doesn't matter if he was in the wrong. Instead of reacting to it hatefully you could have calmly said, "I'm sorry, but your status as a straight white male means that this post is a little hurtful to me, the minority. As the straight white male, you don't have the right to tell the minority how to feel about their oppression" and that would have been fine. But no. Instead, you took the hot-headed approach, and not only burned a long-standing friend and ally, but potentially a lot more people who would have otherwise been great allies because of this guy. I've met half a dozen people through him this summer alone, and his presence is what allowed me to safely have conversations with them, from time to time, about women's issues and queer issues. He facilitates those conversations, and he has those conversations regardless of whether or not a queer person is there. So all those potential allies that he could have converted now have just been introduced to the angry queer, and all their stereotypes about you have been proven right.

This is why it's so very important to shut up if you can't say it in a nice way, because no matter what we say, no matter who we are, someone is always watching, and you don't want someone's first opinion of queer people to be this. There are so many better ways you could have handled that situation. And if I hadn't been there, in person, you can guarantee that you would have lost an ally permanently just because of how badly you handled that situation. 

I see this happen time and time again. Queer people get so offended so quickly by the things the "straight white males" say that they just shut down right there and don't dialogue about it. If we are gonna teach people how to be allies, then the first step to doing that is to teach queers how to make allies. Because this isn't it.