Fine-Tuning the Boundaries of Lesbian Spaces

WHEREAS, lesbians are females exclusively attracted to other females, consistent with Article 1 of the Declaration on Women’s Sex-Based Rights;

RESOLVED, that lesbians have the right to create and maintain lesbian-only spaces;

          – The Lesbian Bill Of Rights

We believe it’s time to begin planning our lesbian spaces, because we think we will soon have the opportunity to create them again.

Because of the incursions made into formerly lesbian spaces by men claiming to be lesbians, much has already been written describing the need for all lesbian spaces to exclude all men. Such exclusion is necessary because, to quote Sheila Jeffreys, “All space becomes male space unless females maintain a concerted effort to mark a space for themselves.” In patriarchy, lesbians are not free to be fully and unselfconsciously themselves under the gaze of even one male. In a culture in which men teach each other that “dyke breaking” (trying to turn a lesbian straight through rape) is a fun fantasy and porn category, or a category of sport similar to hunting animals, that any male presence is incompatible with social, cultural, or political lesbian space.

So this article will not discuss the value of inclusion or exclusion of men from lesbian spaces. Instead, it will discuss how some lesbian spaces might be open to all women, not only lesbians, to the benefit of the social and political interests of lesbians specifically, and of all women generally.

Not all lesbians understand that they are lesbians. This might be because in patriarchy, heterosexuality is required in women, while lesbianism is widely mocked, or claimed not to exist, or punished – socially, religiously, economically, and formerly, criminally. This requirement that every woman must be sexually accessible to a man or men is commonly described as compulsory heterosexuality (“comp het”).

Despite the immense pressure to allow men sexual access, some women in the U.S. have recognized their lesbianism and courageously acted in accordance with it. They have come to embrace lesbianism through a variety of subjectively described routes:

1. Some women and girls were always drawn to women, and simply could never bear to submit to sex with any man.
2. Some have become attracted to a particular woman so strongly that no other sexual possibilities hold any power.
3. Some have lost their attraction to men, gradually or suddenly, for any number of reasons, including an understanding of patriarchy coupled with an acquired admiration for women; disappointment in their male partners; sexual violence by a man or men; or no apparent reason.

So the landscape of lesbian community is complex. Strategically, it seems useful to aim for the greatest possible diversity and inclusion (of women, not men!), and for the greatest possible equality and absence of hierarchy in at least some lesbian spaces. The benefits of creating spaces that welcome women who are re-examining their sexuality, as well as bisexual women (especially the partners of lesbians, so that such couples can attend lesbian events) seem obvious: We create the best possible opportunity for increasing the numbers of women who may eventually come to recognize themselves as lesbians. We also increase the potential social support available; the financial viability of institutions (bars, festivals, journals, and so on, none of which can be run for free); and we generate a larger dating pool. Having greater numbers of women acting on their same-sex attraction tends to counteract the stigma of lesbianism, and to enhance lesbian political potential as well.

There is successful historical precedent for such spaces.

1. Lesbian bars in the U.S. since at least the end of World War II were places where any brave woman could be admitted because nobody checked her lesbian credentials at the door. Once inside, she could order a drink and quietly observe lesbians in their native habitat; or, after gaining even more courage, either from acclimatization or alcohol, she could even talk to lesbians.
2. Michigan Womyns’ Music Festival was an annual lesbian gathering open to all ‘womyn’, meaning all ‘women-born’ women.  Because it was a lesbian gathering, certain conventions applied. For instance, it was bad form for any attendee to talk about the wonderfulness of her boyfriend/husband/son. The culture was more than women-centered; it was lesbian culture. It was not, however, a monolith without differences. Spaces were provided upon request and without judgment to lesbian subcultures, including Black women, radical feminists, women associated with the leather/SM scenes, and much more. But all the women came together to celebrate each other as women, and to enjoy the amazing, woman-centered music.
3. Lesbian coming-out groups existed for decades. They were spaces where women who were questioning their straight or bi sexualities could meet with each other and with lesbians to discuss their thoughts and feelings about their changing perceptions about their own sexuality.  There were no therapists (at least not for a while), as the idea was that every woman was a peer, that there was no pressure, and that a group of women who had previously figured out their lesbianism despite the odds were the best qualified counselors under the circumstances – better, in fact, than the private guidance of a professional therapist working with a woman in isolation. These groups provided a welcoming and instructive gateway, and it also promoted friendship, joy, and community among lesbians and those who wanted to know more about them.

We think that the influence of the transgender lobby is waning. In the U.S. especially, the First-Amendment values of free speech, free association, and free exercise of religion still stand, at least in federal law, against attacks by the transgender lobby. Although the Supreme Court has still not spoken definitively on free speech versus the hurt feelings of men who lie about their sex, the current Conservative majority among the Justices seem unlikely to restrict speech on the basis of hurt feelings, especially now that nearly half of the states have legislation that prohibits medical procedures on minors aimed at disguising sex, limiting women’s and girls’ sports teams to females only, and similar. On the other hand, you never know; these Justices have so far demonstrated little concern for women’s rights (e.g., erasure of the right to abortion, and the mixed results of Bostock v Clayton County, which protected lesbians, but hurt women as a sex class by conflating sexual orientation and “being transgender” in Title VII enforcement, thereby recognizing “transgender” without defining it).

In many states, the promotion of “gender identity” over sex makes lesbian spaces (or women-only spaces) effectively illegal. Even if they are not illegal, uncertain laws can create a chilling effect, along with the recent social environment. But we believe “gender identity” is losing; and we make the following suggestions with an eye toward the future:

1. Lesbian bars should once again be open to women only. While it would be both logistically impossible and undesirable to limit entry to lesbians, it should be understood that if you enter a lesbian bar, you are expected to be respectful of the essential lesbian-ness of the space. Etiquette flowing from this presumption would preclude fawning over men, unicorn hunting (i.e., straight couple seeking a lesbian), or taking offense at polite sexual interest.
2. At least some lesbian festivals, whether focused on music, politics, or something else, should be open to all women. This guidance does not preclude the temporary separation of subgroupings of women by interest, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, or any other factor, at those festivals.
3. Lesbian coming-out groups should be reinstituted. There may be a legal conflict with recent, transgenderist-driven bans on “conversion therapy.” Lesbians should be prepared to differentiate coming-out groups from conversion therapy practices that are rightly banned.

Going forward, should all spaces designated as lesbian, woman-centered spaces be presumptively open to all women? Maybe that’s worth trying in practice. Lesbians would retain the option in those spaces to associate with only other lesbians for some or all of the time, like any other component demographic. Or maybe only some lesbian spaces should be open to all women? We don’t know. We think we need more contemporary experiential data and more discussion if we are to move forward productively on this important issue.

The WDI USA Lesbian Caucus
Lauren Levey, Coordinator
Katherine Kinney
Brandi Kochan
A. Schams

 

Subscribe