Policing femininity

I am getting really sick of all the "gate-keepery-ness" surrounding femme and femininity and even queer for that matter. This stems from a couple of things: 1.) The sort of butch-o-phobia that CAN come with claiming a femme identity, and 2.) People saying that femme is sort of ridiculous circa 2011. These are not compartmentalized, but are woven together, to sort of allow me fodder of frustration. This is also a rant. A RANT! An unorganized rant! As I once wrote (Not that I am a mystical genius, just someone who cares about the interconnection of academic and public activist projects.): If we are to express a desire for queer politics, should there be gate-keepers, who maintain a boundary of the queer canon, whilst others, should not have access to either identifying or being a part of the larger queer political movement? In doing this, who do we metaphorically put up a, “NO (insert marginalized groups) Allowed” sign for? And more importantly who experiences, the materialized e/affects of not being allowed to participate when bodies are dismissed? I am just saying, and this came from Tumblr today, that there was all this discussion around being radical, about being queer, and then someone had the audacity to ask, "What's femme about pajamas?" Fuck that, what isn't femme about pajamas? Just like the haters who say femmes don't need there own conference, because, hey, "What would we talk about?" I'm just saying if you would post that, you probably don't identify as femme (and all of the vast expressions emanating from that space) and should maybe ask it in a way that is indeed, asking a question; not with the underlying assumption that just because you don't know what we would talk about, doesn't mean we don't got some shit to throw down! But again, back to pajamas. My hetero friend asked me once, after writing a paper, if she could identify as a hetero-femme. At first, I was like yeah, definitely. Gender is fluid, sexuality is shifting. I took too many gender studies courses and now I am open to anything...o.k. no, but seriously, it didn't bother me. Then I kind of got annoyed, I was like NO! Femme is my thing and a thing that femme lesbians do. It is rooted in a specific historical and history/cultural context, and it's mine. All mine. So then I thought about that, because that is what I do. Think about shit. All day long. And then I type about shit. And I read two books, one that had an outro by Judith Butler that may have changed my life and the other by these two fabulous sassy femmes who talk about femme as, "A sustained gender identity...a contestatory lesbian identity, a radical feminist position, and a subversive queer model"(Harris and Crocker 1-10). Damn. I wish I had written this book. As for the JB, I do not worship the ground she walks on, but I do think she is effing smart, and despite people thinking she's a white supremacist, with no desire to talk about race, or class-I think she is the opposite. And she's a philosopher, all philosophers are dense, complex, and theoretical. But what I like about this outro essay she wrote are the questions she poses, "If sexuality always threatens to dissolve identity, then what is the final status of those categories by which we seek to understand our sexuality? Are the conceptual means by which we guard against the very sexuality that we seek to affirm? When we seek to judge what will be lesbian, and what will not, do we purport to know precisely what we cannot know? The rush to judgment forecloses the anxiety over the unknown. And yet, was it not the unknown, the not yet, and not ever fully known that drew us here, drew us together, and still, auspiciously, holds us apart?"(Butler in Munt 230). So is holding tightly to our identities, holding us apart? Of course we cannot give up our identities, that isn't even what JB would be saying, but she is asking if they hold us apart and if there are ways to be both invested in material identities and work to disrupt the gate-keeperyness around them. This is not a neo-liberal project, this is a very real concern. So I want to push back on people who say femme IS this, or it ISN'T that because really who knows? So, should my friend be able to identify as hetero-femme, in a post-structuralist utopian society-definitly; in the here and now, I guess if she is reflexive about what that identity means to me and people in my community, I am cool with it? I am looking for allies, in a world that renders me invisible (except for virtually.) To me, it insinuates that she is questioning heterosexual norms and recognizing that gender is performative and performance, and in the end that makes me feel like she is at least trying to negotiate femininity through a heterosexual lens that isn't heterosexist. And there is something to that, to opening up political spaces, for joining together. I don't expect this looks like some happy ending of a fairytale, alliances through and across differences are a lot of friggin work. Work that is very well worth it, work that should not be bound solely in visual identity characteristics; although always aware of the way the material is bound with the ideal/symbolic; but also bound up in the idea of not giving up on each other and being willing to say I am queer, no matter who ya do, in your bedroom, in the street, or for a camera. So in the end, basically, I am saying wear your damn pajamas and revel in femme. Because femme is not an identity bound up only with the visual, but like any other identity, it is something we process over, write about, dress up as, and do. I will never think that, "Femme is who I am." I will think, "Femme fits most comfortably for me at this moment, at this space in time, but it may change (although I hope it doesn't too drastically, because I love my bad-ass boots and skirts.)" And most of all, I don't think we need gender identity police telling me that pajamas aren't as sexy as what a femme should wear, cause' I do femme, and I am wearing long underwear and leg warmers and I feel pretty sexy. And to just talk briefly, I am sick of seeing all of the "Down with the butch-femme dichotomy" bullshit. To me that is just a perpetuation of mostly butch and trans phobia, because I feel like often accompanying these types of propaganda, are women, who claim femme identities, and say they aren't into butches. DO NOT GET ME WRONG! I do NOT think gender and sexuality have to be bound up in the same ways for every person; desire is so complex that it cannot be the same for everyone. But why does it have to be said in such a derogatory way? Like, oh, and that woman over there who prefers short little masculine bois, must be living in some archaic notion of heterosexual fantasy, because she is doing a take on butch-femme. Excuse me, let me bow down and kiss the feet of some folks OBVIOUSLY more enlightened. As I said, desire is complicated, but promoting yourself, while marginalizing another group, who obviously faces some serious friggin dangers everyday, is kind of annoying. Femmes face violence too, I am not tying to exhaust all of the options for ways of being and experiencing the world, but lets not put down a group for the sake of another. (I am probably perpetuating what I am saying not to perpetuate right now, but I am tired and it is getting late, and ma lady is almost home after being gone for a week, so excuse the fact that my brain is, uh, elsewheres.) I will support femmes who desire femmes, as long as they don't do that at the expense of butches, transguys, and genderfuckingqueers. Because like identity, our desires shift and grow over time and with experience and exposure, so you never know who you are going to meet, love, and let's face it, sleep with. Goddess bless. (P.S. I am annoyed at the autocorrect, and apologize for any of its stupidity.)