Oh, I don’t know about that. Drop your pants and I strongly suspect I’ll have a good laugh.
Remember that the gay rights movement and the women’s liberation movement (i.e. second wave feminism) started really picking up steam at about the same time. Both were strongly influenced by the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, and both rode on the waves of broad societal change that characterized the late '60s and early '70s. Stonewall was in 1969. The Feminine Mystique was published in 1963, but things took a while to get going, as the New Left et. al. were focused on the Civil Rights Movement at the time. By 1968 or so, most of the legal battles had been won, and many in the movement were starting to eschew white participation and radicalize (Black Panthers, etc.). And the radical black groups weren’t exactly into women’s equality. So large numbers of activist women turned their attention to “women’s lib.”
By the early 1970s, lesbian women found themselves fighting on two fronts at once, and they didn’t necessarily fit in with either movement too well.
The males in the gay rights movement…trying to think of a gentle way to phrase this…they didn’t necessarily want to share the spotlight with the lesbians. Over time, they came to realize that homosexual men’s and women’s interests and issues were in fact closely aligned, and that fighting together made them stronger, but for a long time, lesbians were marginalized.
And women in the women’s movement didn’t always want to be strongly associated with lesbians either. They didn’t want people to misunderstand what they were fighting for. They wanted equality in the workplace, in the political realm, and in their marriages. They didn’t want to rid their personal lives of men. They didn’t want to be seen as “man-haters.” They were concerned about men feeling threatened, and a woman who can say “eh, you’re useless to me” was pretty damn threatening to many men of the time. This is not to say that there weren’t many lesbians who were central to the women’s movement. There were. But who was the most visible and popular symbol of the movement? Gloria Steinem, a gorgeous heterosexual woman.
Meanwhile, lesbian women were getting a real double-whammy because they were suffering from both the disadvantages of being women (like lower paying jobs, and lower pay for the same job) and the disadvantages of being gay (like not being able to marry a man and benefit from his higher salary, health insurance, pension, etc.) As a whole, they had more to overcome than either group. (And these problems persist, of course.)
So in light of all that, it’s not surprising that lesbians of the time developed a largely insular culture, and one which allowed, or even encouraged, women to deemphasize the traditional trappings of femininity.
Now, I’m in not arguing that lesbians “had it harder” than gay men. But “their responses to those challenges [were] distinctly different” because the challenges were distinctly different.
I read that part of the sentence. If I went to the bar in sweat pants, glasses and a baggy t-shirt, I wouldn’t get hit on at all, by men I considered attractive or undesirable. To attract lovers at all most women need to put forth considerable effort, much as most men do.
Spongebob tattoos will do that.
I don’t suppose this means anything, but the lesbians I’ve had the most contact with were all --each in their own way-- very friendly, very funny, and seemingly by nature upbeat. And I think they are all of the older generation of lesbians that some have identified as the dour group.
My aunt very smiley and has a goofy sense of humor that she inflicts on everyone she can. If you remove the ‘dour’ part, I’d say she fits the older lesbian visual stereotype reasonably well (though not the butchest-butch style).
A former co-worker of mine fit the visual stereotype very well (short-cropped hair, utilitarian clothes, heavy set: she used to be a bouncer), but she laughed more than anyone I know and was very friendly to everyone at work. She’d be grumpy occasionally because of back problems, but even then she was admirably pleasant to be around (I’ve known some people with back pain that become unbearable when it’s acting up).
A third friend of mine is loud and boisterous and love to laugh and make off-color, often un-PC, jokes. She has a tendency toward ebulliant enthusiasm that is infectious.
I don’t know that this means anything, it’s just my experience.
A former co-worker of mine who
Lesbians are serious and dour just like lumberjacks are barrel-chested, White boys can’t jump, and racial profiling is accurate.
That is to say, they’re not. Some are, some aren’t. There are folks that are bang-on a particular stereotype and ones you’d never guess were spelunkers.
Whodathunk?
Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winnah!
Until I read a lot of the responses, I thought the OP meant this as a joke thread. Sadly, the OP is serious.
Well, it’s usually pretty easy to tell who the spelunkers are, due to the gear and all.
Well, they usually leave their equipment out in their Subarus, but yeah, if you see their cars, it’s a pretty good giveaway.
I watched a segment on one of those news magazine shows featuring a psychologist-type person who said she could predict lesbianism in individuals by examining their facial expressions in childhood photos. Smiley faced little girls grew up to be straight. Girls wearing a grimace or an obviously forced smile tended to grow up to be lesbian.
It was interesting, to be sure, but I’m thinking she was only capturing the most masculine “subset” that’s been referred to in this thread.
Show me the research base and I’ll consider it.
Interesting choice of simile.
What two consenting adults do in the privacy of their cave with long sections of rope, Carabiners, and a sturdy ice axe is just none of my business. :eek: 
So this psychologist claims to be able to recognize a lesbian from a childhood photo while millions of men can’t do it face to face when they’re asking for a date?
OP’s Answer – Open Mike at the Comedy Club Version:
Sure, I admit it; we guys always look at a woman’s breasts when we meet her. Not stare, just look…just to touch base. And yes, for every woman who has at least one moist egg in her ovaries left, the first thing that goes through our minds is (breathes heavily into microphone to deliver punch line) “could I hit that?” (waits for the laugh)
Now women don’t to that. They don’t automatically check out our packages or butts or wonder what we’re like in bed, no! They can be focused on what they’re doing, or just not in the mood.
No, what women do it this: whenever one of their girlfriends introduces them to her new boyfriend, from the same reptilian brain stem that sends guys the impulse to ask “could I hit that," what women automatically think (breathes heavily into microphone to deliver punch line) “I could steal him away from her” (waits for the laugh)
So what to gay guys do? Do they think “I could steal him away from him…and (breathes heavily into microphone to deliver punch line) he really has a nice butt.” (waits for the laugh)
Which leaves us with those grim, unsmiling lesbians, who, when they meet their girlfriend’s new girlfriends, say (breathes heavily into microphone to deliver punch line) “so how do you think the Mystics will do?” (waits for some members of the audience to explain the WNBA reference, and the laugh)
Not bad, but I would go with Carrie Nation.
Mine too, extremely.