Lezbehonest about Queer Politics Erasing Lesbian Women

February 23, 2017

Sister Outrider

This post is the second in a series of essays on sex, gender, and sexuality. The first is available here. I have written about lesbian erasure because I refuse to be rendered invisible. By raising my voice in dissent, I seek to offer both a degree of recognition to other lesbian women and active resistance to any political framework – het or queer – that insists lesbians are a dying breed. If women loving and prioritising other women is a threat to your politics, I can guarantee you are a part of the problem and not the solution.

Dedicated to SJ, who makes me proud to be a lesbian. Your kindness brightens my world.


lesbian_feminist_liberation Lesbian is once more a contested category.  The most literal definition of lesbian – a homosexual woman – is subject to fresh controversy. This lesbophobia does not stem from social conservatism, but manifests within the…

View original post 1,645 more words

2 Responses to “Lezbehonest about Queer Politics Erasing Lesbian Women”


  1. Sheila Jeffery’s talked about the destruction of lesbians via queer politics as well. Some really good reads are here:
    file:///home/chronos/u-7c7718aeae807bfa50751e8eae142bc1f65a3c04/Downloads/Unpacking%20Queer%20Politics%20-%20Sheila%20Jeffreys.pdf

    file:///home/chronos/u-7c7718aeae807bfa50751e8eae142bc1f65a3c04/Downloads/Sheila%20Jeffreys%20The%20Queer%20Disappearance%20of%20lesbians.pdf

  2. D Gray Says:

    What about the term “lesbian” is at all ambiguous? It is defined as: “a woman who is sexually attracted to other women” and woman is defined as: “an adult female human being,” and female is defined as: “belonging or relating to women, or the sex that can give birth to young or produce eggs” (Cambridge Dictionary). Nothing about that is ambiguous. It admits only for biological females who are attracted to other biological females.

    All this stuff about “woman” meaning anyone who identifies as such is b.s. They have no regard for the actual definition at all — or even the word “identify.” Seriously. “Identify” means: “to recognize someone or something and say or prove who or what that person or thing is” with an example being: “The police officer identified himself (= gave his name or proved who he was) and asked for our help” (Cambridge Dictionary). This means that “identifying” is about saying what you actually are, not citing some unprovable internal feeling. You can say you feel however you want, but that doesn’t make it an objective fact or push that subjectivity into objective reality. A police officer identifies himself as a police officer by saying that he is one. If trans people “identified” themselves in the same vein, they’d say as transwomen that they’re males who feel a kinship with women, not that they *are* women or female — because they’re not. That would also extend to the use of the word “lesbian” being solely for females. Really. I mean, this is probably one of the oldest misappropriations out there. I can’t think of one lesbian I’ve met who hasn’t had some guy say to her: “oh, well I’m a lesbian, too.” — No. No, you’re not.

    These people are just abusing language to their own ends. It’s sad that anyone would listen to them. They’re obviously some combination of very uneducated and very mentally unstable.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: