As one woman-born-woman lesbian feminist to another, I
salute Lisa Vogel’s nuanced and in-depth letter to the Community about the
issue of transwomen at the Michigan Women’s Music Festival. A response from
Vogel is long overdue.
I want to highlight the sentence which I believe forms the
core of her essay, that is:
“I passionately believe the healing in our community will
occur when we unconditionally accept transwomyn as womyn while not dismissing
or disavowing the lived experience and realities of the WBW gender identity.”
This is well said and accurate. I hope this healing day
comes soon. Perhaps the Millennial generation, as they grow, will no longer
find this an issue because they can hold in their minds an equal appreciation
of the “lived experience” of WBW and the validity of transwomen as two different genders.
Meanwhile, there are other qualities of being a lesbian that
I have long questioned about Michigan ’s current—but dated—policy. An aspect which Vogel doesn’t address.
As a woman born woman and a butch, the “lived experience” of
being “woman-born” has been somewhat confusing to me because I was socialized
as male as well as female. Growing up my parents and sibs treated me as
gender-neutral or mixed gendered. I was raised as my father’s son and my
mother’s daughter. Many of my characteristics (dress, thinking, relational
dynamics, etc.) are what were termed “masculine” in the '60s.
I know this is to
be similar for thousands of butches I have met or talked to over many decades.
Yet, butches can go to Michigan .
Transmen can go to Michigan .
But transwomen can do so only covertly. Butches and transmen, most of whom are more male than Michigan's policy suggests transwomen to be, are welcomed at the festival. This policy holds little logic.
Is Vogel saying that butches are women-born-women? This is,
at best, only partial true. Most transmen I know appear to have less “lived
experience” as a woman than I did. Are Vogel and other supporters of the
current policy, then talking about how
much “lived experience” is enough to get one overtly into Michigan ? How much is enough? Five years,
twenty? Slicing and dicing this qualitatively or quantitatively is a path too
complex and inherently too dishonest for us to go down.
I think we should instead go down the path of self-identity
as being a valid enough I.D.
If a transwoman has ‘voted’ to take on the burdens of female
identification I believe that is license enough to admit her into a female-only
venue. Especially if she is a feminist and/or aware and educated enough, as
many WBW are not, of what it means
to be a feminist.
Fortunately, perhaps only as an accident of timing, I came
of age at the dawn of feminism and was privileged enough to be taught the value
of being a woman, a feminist, a lesbian, and a women of color in an otherwise
sexist (and racist) world.
So, as a butch feminist, I challenge Michigan to take the next evolutionary step
and ‘straighten’ out its illogical and non-foundational interpretation of
femaleness.
I put out my thoughts and opinion in order to further our
discussion of what it means to be a woman in 2013.
If responding, please
remember the truly foundational precept of feminism—sisters talking to sisters.
So let’s talk and not hurl (accusations)!
If Michigan
doesn’t stand for that, what does it stand for?