-21
lesbianPolitical lesbianism
Are we as an RF, same sex attracted community, sacrificing political lesbianism, due to how many other attacks there are on lesbian only space from 3rd wave liberal feminism and identity politics?
I'd never join a lifelong lesbian space. I'd never join a gold star lesbian space. I'd never join a butch lesbian space. (For that matter I'd never join a femme lesbian space.)
I do join lesbian spaces.
I chose to be lesbian after first becoming RF and following it to its logical end which I believe is feminist separatism; and secondly after a fundamental xtian het marriage I had ended in misogynist abuse and cheating. I've been lesbian for 8 years. I don't have emotional or sexual interest in men, I even don't have friends who are men.
I'm no stranger to being asked to leave lesbian only space, or challenged regarding whether I belong in lesbian only space due to aspects of my life history.
Political lesbianism in terms of purely rejecting sexual relationships with men, alone, I can understand why that does not a lesbian make.
If people want to describe me as a female exclusive bisexual that's their call.
I think second wave feminists were onto a good thing when they advocated for political lesbianism in the sense of lesbianism by choice.
And I feel we're losing that wisdom and liberation.
What happened to Every Woman Can Be A Lesbian - Alix Dobkin? What about the writings of 2nd wave lesbian separatist RF writer Bev Jo Von Dohre and her publication Dykes Loving Dykes?
We don't need to defend lesbianism by saying ALL lesbians were "born this way" and therefore should not be subject to "conversion" therapy (masking / suppression indoctrination).
Why wouldn't choosing relationships with women alone be a superior choice to het / bi in an RF context?
I see too many women fucked over by men and going back to men. If there ARE women (and there are) who have experienced realising the misogyny for the first time, and have never been able to stomach or conscience relationships with men after that; women who've fallen in love with women after that, why wouldn't we acknowledge them as they are? Lesbians by choice. And welcome them into the lesbian community. Even if it's merely a lesbians by choice community.
I do have a discord and a FB page, both titled "Choose Loving Women" (naturally it was impossible for me to resist stylising this as "Ch⚢se L♀ving W♀men", the letter "o", sorrynotsorry I couldn't resist). Please feel free to pm for the discord if political lesbianism is your jam. Admittedly I know basically nothing about discord so it's very much bare bones at this point.
Lesbians who don't have an issue with lesbians by choice most welcome 💜
So what's happening with promoting the knowledge that women can choose to be lesbian? Why are we not preserving this like other aspects of the 2nd wave? What can we do to engender better understanding about lesbianism by choice?
She sounds like one smart lady. She decided on party affiliation based on underlying principles she agreed with. Good. The GOP needs her. And the Democratic Party needs people like her too. I wish her well.
The republican party... at its core... not at its extreme right like the media likes to put on display.... is about freedom, freedom from government control over our bodies and land... its really about creating a better America by building stronger within and then without.
This was my experience when I entered the Tea Party movement years ago. When you're raised on cartoon stereotypes of Republicans being hateful, religious nutjobs, they seem like absolute angels when you meet them in person.
In watching mainstream media, I found many times I was lied to or misdirected in the information they were giving... and that information always leaned to the left.
This was true for me as well. I realized that leftie media was complete bullshit when I saw them characterize a Tea Party event I actually attended as full of racism and violence when it was the exact opposite. Anyone who spouted racist nonsense or got violent was kicked out. But CNN only interviewed the lunatics WHO WERE THROWN OUT and ignored the actual organizers and normal attendees. They also said it was all White when it clearly wasn't
And, of course, CNN minimized the rampant antisemitism and violence that happened at left wing events
So I'm a liberal conservative. I’m trying to bring a fresh new face to the republican party… especially for my ppl and my generation.
Wow. I see so much of my younger self in her. I hope she succeeds and inspires a wave of young women to change the GOP from the inside. As someone who has been active in both left and right wing groups, I feel that shifting the Republicans to be more liberal/feminist would be WAY easier than shifting Democrats out of genderwoo and identity politics.
When you're raised on cartoon stereotypes of Republicans being hateful, religious nutjobs, they seem like absolute angels when you meet them in person.
I was raised in a Republican household. They're not absolute angels. Some of the things I've seen, heard, and experienced -- not necessarily as a result of politics but rather underlying belief systems ... Suffice it to say, I choke back bile when thinking of voting for any Republican. At the same time, I vote not for a party but for a person.
I recall tea party members spitting on members of the Congressional Black Caucus, including John Lewis, as they walked up the steps to Congress. Nothing racist about that.
IIRC, nobody ever provided proof that actually happened despite cameras being everywhere when it allegedly did.
That’s very interesting, the only stuff I ever saw about the Tea Party (whatever the source, US or Australian) was uniformly derisive ... and presumably inaccurate.
The Tea Party is an inherently racist organization that was formed after the election of Barack Obama. They threatened democratic lawmakers during the passage of the affordable care act and are basically an extension of fox news. I'm shocked to read some of these posts. Perhaps the event penny gadget attended wasn't bad, but you only have to read their own site and listen to their members to see how backwards they are. This is disappointing. They are not progressive or feminist.
All this simping for the Republican Party is going to drive me batty. Yes, they oppose genderwoo. That doesn't make them our allies. I'm sure that many individual Republican voters are quite decent and pleasant, and Republicans in local government may in fact be reasonable human beings trying to do right by their constituents, but I'll be shocked if anyone can provide evidence of Republicans in national government:
The list goes on, of course, but you get the point.
What's genuinely aggravating about the state of politics, as they are just now, is that no one, and I do mean no one, is reaching across the aisle to work together.
They used to do that. I know it's hard for younger people to imagine -- but that genuinely used to be a thing. Politicians used to work together to achieve goals that worked for Americans in general. There were certainly still marginalized people (women, minorities, impoverished people), but they at least were willing to compromise. No one is willing to compromise anymore -- it's a matter of winning at all costs.
I’m about 30 and even I don’t feel I have a grasp of ‘normal’ politics.
I was like 10 when 9/11 happened and around 20 when Obama was elected and things really started getting partisan. I don’t remember much about politics pre-Obama, beyond the highlights.
Thing is though, what have the Dems actually done to support any of the above? The same 3 industries are the top contributors to both parties in the US.
I don't have the time to get into a debate over this, but here's one concrete example.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1532440020941794
The article is paywalled, but the authors write about their research here. This is the key finding:
Using a dataset of state-level toxic chemical releases from 1993 to 2012, we were able to test the effects of Republican control of national and state executive and legislative branches (President, Congress, Governor, State Legislatures) on the concentration of pollution in states. [...] Specifically, pollution concentrations tend to be 10 percent higher under Republican governors and about 37 percent higher under Republican Congresses, based on the average pollution concentration in our dataset. Unsurprisingly, when we re-ran these models to test the effects of Democratic control, we found the opposite effect in that Democratic Governors and Congresses were correlated with lower pollution concentrations.
Yes, I am keenly aware of the corruption and incompetence of the Democratic Party. The Republicans are still significantly worse.
Tea Partiers were against the bank bailouts, the government expansion, the meddling in the marketplace and the borrowing and taxation "needed" after the housing bubble burst and the economy melted down. TARP, The Recovery Act, ZIRP and QE inspired the Tea Party, not having a black president. If anything, they were already getting restless during the Bush admin, with GBW's unpaid for wars and other violations of standard republican values. GWB signed off on TARP, and then Obama continued it.
The MSM just loved to paint the Tea Party as some kind of racist organization, but it was mainly about taxation and debt. And government intervention in the marketplace. Local groups added other regional issues like illegal immigration. That was about jobs, but was spun as racist. (Sound familiar?) As was their objections to Obama's ACA. The ACA was an affront to the TPs from many perspectives, but mainly because it was the epitome of Big Gov (bureaucratic BS meddling in citizen's lives with ideology attached) and a huge giveaway of taxed (and/or borrowed) money to health insurance companies.
You're giving the Tea Party movement way too much credit, and are ignoring the history of the movement itself, and the history of the Republican Party that predates it (specifically the Southern Strategy). The movement formed in 2009 and relied on racial animosity to drive up membership. So yes, having a black president, and a changing demographic, was a major reason.
Moreover, that movement, and the fear tactics and misinformation they employ[ed], was a precursor to the 2016 election. And it's known as a racist organization because it actually is. Many members pushed the ''birther'' controversy, and made claims without any evidence or backing. That is racist. Members have likened immigrants to vermin, questioned President Obama's legitimacy, and called the Obamas ''uppity.'' These are just a few examples.
While I agree with other posters saying how frustrating it is that people aren't reaching across the aisle, I believe the current Republican Party is a lost cause.
I have no doubts that there were assorted overlaps. And some nuts to nutpick. There always are. But the Tea Party movement (named for the Boston Tea Party) was primarily about taxation, big gov and debt. Maybe it was all those ugly things and more in isolated spots. But it wasn’t in others. It was a loosely organized informal sort of movement and regional groups had other regional aims. Not every TPer was a Birther. Or a racist.
We're about to lose Roe v. Wade because of which party, again?
Never thought I would be willing (and wanting!) To vote for a Republican. Too bad I don't live there!
We have to rethink how we think about the South. 56% of African Americans live in the South.
Every time a "progressive" business says "I will not do business in the South" - who is really being punished? Powerful rich conservatives? Nope.
Just because poor people aren't that bothered by the "N word" doesn't mean they are actually "the most racist" - it's the opposite, poor neighbors have more mixed race couples and mixed race people.
I'm reading "Woke Racism" right now, and it's breaking down the different aspects of Anti-Racism (the extreme version online today) and how "being white" is seen as "original sin" - something you can repent for but never cast off.
I agree with a lot of this, but ...
The republican party... at its core... not at its extreme right like the media likes to put on display.... is about freedom, freedom from government control over our bodies and land...
Not at all factual
n watching mainstream media, I found many times I was lied to or misdirected in the information they were giving... and that information always leaned to the left.
Eh no. The corporate media favors capitalism. It is not left wing.
Agree with you on point number one, disagree on point number two. Leaning to the left isn't the same as being leftist. "Diversity and Inclusion" is capitalism now lol
Republicans are responsible for the push to reverse Row v Wade, so unfortunately, in practice, they do not support freedom.
Not at all factual
Uh, yes it is. Conservatives have absolutely been unfairly stereotyped. Just like us "TERFs"
Thats not to say that they're all wonderful. But she made a valid point there
The corporate media favors capitalism. It is not left wing.
You think left wingers can't be capitalists? Why do you think genderwoo and corporate virtue signaling is a thing? Democrats and media outlets wouldn't do it if they didn't get that sweet Big Pharma and Pritzker cash
You've... watched the news at any point in the last 30 years right?
Not at all factual Not at all anything other than your personal opinion.
She has zero political experience, other than serving on a Historic Preservation Commission. And she thinks she should be a Senator? She hasn't even served on a City Council. I have little patience for people with no real experience who think they should serve in one of the highest positions in our government.
It seem
Other than being anti-vaccine mandates, there is nothing in her platform that aligns with the GOP platform. That is like saying you are Catholic because you like the wafer, but believe in predestination, that the Earth is 6,000 years old, and Jesus wasn't the Messiah.
She has zero political experience
Why shouldn't she be a senator? While I see what you're saying wrt her lack of experience, men do this kind of shit all the time. Didn't AOC shoot up pretty quick? In general I dislike the "professional politician" type that currently runs everything.
AOC is in the House, not the Senate, and she hasn't been particularly effective. States only have 2 Senators, sending someone who has no idea what the job entails is a lot more consequential for those who live in that state than having one inexperienced/unqualified rep out of over 2 dozen reps. I don't support men who run for high office with little to no relevant experience to speak of either. Everyone she feel free to get involved in politics. But thinking you are qualified to have he highest elected legislative position in the country based on being on a Historic Preservation Commission is disqualifying in itself. Same with Cynthia Nicole thinking she should be governor. Especially at the federal level, the legislative process is so complex, constituents are not well served sending people with no experience demonstrating they can negotiate how the body functions. I don't see how she is different that Madison Cawthorn, Marjorie Taylor Greene or Lauren Bobert.
It's very interesting but how many seats would have to be taken over by some brand of "moderate republican" for their to be any actual hope of the RNC shifting any positions on real issues.. and to what extent can you run as a Repub but then act in office according to largely Dem party lines - is it a question of funding for campaigns? Or can they take you off of ballots, or what? What do you owe the party by saying you belong to it -
If there aren't really any ties that bind - and we've already given up on "woman" meaning something - why demand Republican has to... maybe we could graduate to a more parliamentary system if people were able to run on specific platforms instead of just declaring which party they belonged to.
Curious to see where this leads, or what limits there may be.
Her response really doesn’t satisfy me. I need more about what she thinks is good/right about Republicans, not what’s wrong with Democrats.
I see many flaws with the Democrats, but will never vote Republican because they disgust me 90% of the time. I can’t think of a major issue I agree with them on, aside from the gender nonsense; and even then our roots are different.
I have nothing against her personally, but I really don’t understand her decision.
I don't completely understand her decision either. But if she can help move Republicans from the far right to a more sensible middle ground, good for her.
Yeah I guess what I got from her response is..Democrats don’t align with me for whatever reason so I’m going to be a democrat but call myself a Republican in protest? I am still confused but tbh we need more republicans who are normal and moderate like this, and who don’t get immediately shitted on the moment they call out the Trump zombie cult, like Romney and Cheney got dragged for
I can't speak for her. But I think the positive draw of the GOP for her is the fact that they accept her despite her more leftie views on many tentpole issues. She could NEVER run as a Democrat because she'd be excommunicated and called an Uncle Tom simply for saying that women exist and deserve our own spaces (even if she agreed with EVERYTHING ELSE on the Democrat platform). If she wants a career in politics, there's literally nowhere else she can go
How much is she being accepted? And how much is she viewed as not a threat, therefore not worth the effort to take down?
I googled her and looked at her twitter, she has 30 followers and very little engagement. I don’t see voters in Louisiana lining up to vote for a former Democrat from California. She didn’t do so well as a Democrat either, she got 1.5% of the votes in the 2020 primary for the metro council of district 10. (Ballotpedia)
I don't think she expects to win her first election. I think she's just getting her name out there for now
Yup. It's definitely the R's that are the most bigoted.
They want to strip social programs, force women to give birth, remove environmental protections, and their main political strategy is obstruction.
So yes, I’m disgusted.
I live in a purple area in a blue state, I’m familiar with both sides. I have Republicans in my family. My feelings are not based on a blue bubble. I’ve seen the hate from both parties. The difference is I agree with the Democrats about many more issues than Republicans, and at this point a third choice isn’t viable.