Scarleteen

Hi all! (I'm new on here)
What are some opinions on the use of transmasculine lesbian as a gender label? I know that personally I feel like a boy in most ways (I am AFAB), but I also feel like a masculine female in some ways (I am not a fan of the binary, clearly). I feel like these are not contradictory feelings, even though other people see them that way; therefore, I concocted the label "transmasculine lesbian", which I feel like would get a lot of flak from people. Does anyone else see this as a logical statement, or am I living in my own "man, gender is weird" bubble?

Hi notlob (is that a Monty Python reference, btw?)

Hopefully some other folks will be able to chime in as well, but one thought I wanted to offer is about considering alternate ways of thinking about attraction. Specifically, there are ways of talking about or thinking about attraction and orientation that is not defined solely by the gender of the person you're attracted to. Would that be something you're interested in learning more about?

If I'm getting this right, this is basically a modernization of butch lesbian, with extra room made for the fact that you don't identify yourself as a cisgender woman?

I ask just to give you a feel for my takeaway as someone hearing the term you've come up with so you can get a feel for if how someone -- just this one person, obviously, though, and someone older, whose life experience has included a lot of butch women who ID'd that way before genderqueer or trans identities were more codified or nuanced -- interprets that term hearing it, and if that takeaway feels like what you're after as a takeaway.

I don't have any issues with the term you're using, but then, I, personally, won't with most: I think of these kinds of language just as someone's shorthand to describe themselves, and it's always a given for me to ask more if I don't feel like I get it and it matters to me to get it. It's also always a given for me that that shorthand is only shorthand and by no means tells me much.

Like Sam suggested, if this term doesn't feel so great to YOU, though, one thing I can think of that might take some of the load off is using language about your orientation (your external attraction) that doesn't reference your own gender in any way, just the gender of the people you're attracted to.

(Also, if there is a "Man, gender is weird," bubble, we're right there in it with you. )

Sam W wrote:Hi notlob (is that a Monty Python reference, btw?)

Hopefully some other folks will be able to chime in as well, but one thought I wanted to offer is about considering alternate ways of thinking about attraction. Specifically, there are ways of talking about or thinking about attraction and orientation that is not defined solely by the gender of the person you're attracted to. Would that be something you're interested in learning more about?

Yes, Monty Python!
Yeah, I know there are other ways of thinking about attraction, and I have thought of them. This is just because I personally (partly!) identify as a lesbian. But only partly. So, just trying to reconcile it. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Heather wrote:If I'm getting this right, this is basically a modernization of butch lesbian, with extra room made for the fact that you don't identify yourself as a cisgender woman?

That pretty much sums it up, I guess. Genderqueer is the other term that kind of makes sense to me, but it has similar problems, I guess. In many ways, I seem like I could be FTM, but I also have this (smaller, I suppose) part of me that identifies as female.

So, if what you have come up with feels best, and other options feel like less of a fit, then it sounds to me like you have your term. Again, all of this is only shorthand, and just like, say, when someone says they're an omnivore, that really only tells you the barest basics of how they eat, the same goes here. If someone doesn't get what you mean by this, wants to know more, or if and when YOU feel you want to get more specific for yourself, you can.

I also think about terms like this like, say, a new pair of shoes. We get them because they seem like they'll do the job, but then we have to wear them around for a while to find out if they do, and if not, we either get a new pair, or wear them with different socks or for something different than we got them for in the first place.

Yeah; I don't even know if this label applies well to me yet. But I will add this one to my box of "eh, could be me, maybe" terms. It could always help me figure things out, who knows! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯