![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
raybearOn Wednesday night, in the middle of talking about something only somewhat related, MelRo and I got into a discussion about the concept of attraction and connection and desire. And she said something unintentionally startling, which was that when she thinks of our relationship, she thinks of herself as being in a relationship with a man. As a transguy I'm supposed to rejoice or something, but to be odd, it felt strangely foreign. Thinking about it now, I realize how disconnected my identity is from my body, even if my body looks how I want and how I feel most comfortable. I'm not always sure of my internal identity either -- sometimes it's almost too fluid. If folks' gender (and sexuality) was an organized religion, I would be universalist unitarian. Or a dabbler. Some new age-y pretentious flake who likes to embody other peoples' historical traditions in a cheeky manner.
But since it's not really spirituality and ancestry we're talking about co-opting, I don't feel like a poser for doing so. But sometims I do feel like I'm lacking a firm foundation to stand on.
I'm obviously enamored with masculinity, on others and on me. I'd probably fck myself in a heartbeat, given an adequate opportunity. And I'm intrigued and turned on often my masculinity and men. But part of me feels absolutely confused in how or why I'm attracted.
I consider my dynamic with MelRo to be different/same, where the first describe outer features and the latter describe internal features. There's a binary here, which I'm sure most folks oppose, but my vision here is more fluid, and besides I like numbers and prefer two-dimensions, so let me try to clarify. When I say "different", I mean the distance between where we're located on the linear spectrum is more than half of the total distance. So physically speaking, MelRo and I are more different than alike, even though there are some similarities. But internally speaking, our gender expression within our personality is more alike than different.
She's the first Different/Same relationship I'd had, though now that I think about it, my best friend in high school who I was in love with off and on was a Different/Same (D/S -- not to be confused with dominant-submissive). My relationship with Karen started out Same/Different and ended up Different/Different -- which is not what she wanted. Though techinically I felt like it was D/D from the beginning, I just hadn't articulated it.
My attraction to femme women is under this category of D/D. It's one of my favorite dynamics, I think, just because it's so intriguing and erotically charged for me. But that doesn't mean it's the only option I desire or even what I think works best for me over the long-term. I don't really know at this point and I'm not really concerned with trying to project or change my life based on some idle perceptions.
Transguys I've known (or dated) have had more of a same/same dynamic, which is not particularly interesting to me in a sexual relationship, but makes for great friendships and feelings of family. And bioguys I know well (namely Damon) are same/same, but more likely they're almost-same/almost-same.
Or the strange nebulous category of same-different/same-different. My attraction to men is confusing to me, because I'm not always sure where the similarities and differences lie and which ones attract me and which ones scare.
With women I've been able to achieve a comfortable level of being different. I haven't experienced that yet with a guy -- the ability to be different/same while still being a guy. Or maybe almost-same/same is a better way to put it, but that implies I'm striving for same, and I'm not.
I wonder about the possibly dynamic of same/different with me and a femme transwoman -- it would obviously be a different kind of same, because our bodies would be different, but we would have possibly traveled over the same places of the scale, just moving in opposite directions. So the sameness would come from us both experiencing the wider range and understanding the fluidity and malleable forces.
I realize that I'm probably making no sense, trying to distill a wide range of complicated identities into two words describing two points of view (outside looking in and inside looking out), but this makes sense in my head.
I think I just need to re-read some femme writings, like Joan and Amber, who are often able to perfectl articulate concepts I previously thought indescribable. And find out what (queer) men are writing about similar ideas -- I don't have as many books in my library coming from the other side.
(Any suggestions you may have are welcome.)
But since it's not really spirituality and ancestry we're talking about co-opting, I don't feel like a poser for doing so. But sometims I do feel like I'm lacking a firm foundation to stand on.
I'm obviously enamored with masculinity, on others and on me. I'd probably fck myself in a heartbeat, given an adequate opportunity. And I'm intrigued and turned on often my masculinity and men. But part of me feels absolutely confused in how or why I'm attracted.
I consider my dynamic with MelRo to be different/same, where the first describe outer features and the latter describe internal features. There's a binary here, which I'm sure most folks oppose, but my vision here is more fluid, and besides I like numbers and prefer two-dimensions, so let me try to clarify. When I say "different", I mean the distance between where we're located on the linear spectrum is more than half of the total distance. So physically speaking, MelRo and I are more different than alike, even though there are some similarities. But internally speaking, our gender expression within our personality is more alike than different.
She's the first Different/Same relationship I'd had, though now that I think about it, my best friend in high school who I was in love with off and on was a Different/Same (D/S -- not to be confused with dominant-submissive). My relationship with Karen started out Same/Different and ended up Different/Different -- which is not what she wanted. Though techinically I felt like it was D/D from the beginning, I just hadn't articulated it.
My attraction to femme women is under this category of D/D. It's one of my favorite dynamics, I think, just because it's so intriguing and erotically charged for me. But that doesn't mean it's the only option I desire or even what I think works best for me over the long-term. I don't really know at this point and I'm not really concerned with trying to project or change my life based on some idle perceptions.
Transguys I've known (or dated) have had more of a same/same dynamic, which is not particularly interesting to me in a sexual relationship, but makes for great friendships and feelings of family. And bioguys I know well (namely Damon) are same/same, but more likely they're almost-same/almost-same.
Or the strange nebulous category of same-different/same-different. My attraction to men is confusing to me, because I'm not always sure where the similarities and differences lie and which ones attract me and which ones scare.
With women I've been able to achieve a comfortable level of being different. I haven't experienced that yet with a guy -- the ability to be different/same while still being a guy. Or maybe almost-same/same is a better way to put it, but that implies I'm striving for same, and I'm not.
I wonder about the possibly dynamic of same/different with me and a femme transwoman -- it would obviously be a different kind of same, because our bodies would be different, but we would have possibly traveled over the same places of the scale, just moving in opposite directions. So the sameness would come from us both experiencing the wider range and understanding the fluidity and malleable forces.
I realize that I'm probably making no sense, trying to distill a wide range of complicated identities into two words describing two points of view (outside looking in and inside looking out), but this makes sense in my head.
I think I just need to re-read some femme writings, like Joan and Amber, who are often able to perfectl articulate concepts I previously thought indescribable. And find out what (queer) men are writing about similar ideas -- I don't have as many books in my library coming from the other side.
(Any suggestions you may have are welcome.)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
i like this
Date: 2002-06-07 02:05 pm (UTC)i tihnk the thing that works best for me in general is same/same--or at least some elements of sameness.
which is weird, as my self-image and my body changes, because who i am attracted to changes as well...
Offer
Date: 2002-06-07 02:43 pm (UTC)He said, "But aren't you predominantly attracted to men/boys?"
I replied, in that miffed tone only me and my mothers can summon, "No."
I had never thought about it like that.
What I know is that my relationships with women were always troubled... usually because in the beginning, they showed themselve as being strong and independent (like my mothers... yeah, yeah, spare me Freud...), but then they would collapse into some weak, sniffling thing which just repelled me. Like... completely.
So I fare better with boys, but I don't get crushes on boys very often, unless he's femmy... and girls when they're mascy (if I can)...
and it dawned on me, looking at Ryan, that I am actually attracted to other people with gender blurs (meshs, blends... ) whether they know it or not. I can pick it out like a pig rooting out truffles. THAT to me is attractive, but I like it lived... not put on.
The dumb faggot made me think of something (sorry, but he tried, unsuccessfully, to fuck us that night... we were just NOT having it... if we want you, we'll GET you... otherwise, simma down!)... my sexuality is based on gender -- a specific quality of gender even. I don't want one side or the other, I want GRAY... nothing else will do.
I am attracted to the way people blur gender, blend it together to make a cake... and I want to eat it all up. I think the reason I get crushes so easily on women is because, in a sense, they are free-er to do this. Men are socialized (see, there is a history to it... I had to fight in order not to be crushed because I voted to be ahistorical before I realized I was in a history...) to BE masculine. You can see it in even femme gay guys -- that little cache of pig. ...but I'm not fooled by it...
Gay really has little use to me these days... the more and more I think about it, the more it doesn't fit. If my sexuality is not predicated on same-gender attraction, but on blurred or meshed or blended gender attraction... what does that mean? (Besides pomosexual?)
Peace,
Da Q'ster
Re: Offer
Date: 2002-06-07 03:00 pm (UTC)What I know is that my relationships with women were always troubled... usually because in the beginning, they showed themselve as being strong and independent (like my mothers... yeah, yeah, spare me Freud...), but then they would collapse into some weak, sniffling thing which just repelled me. Like... completely.
This reminds me a lot of something she told me once regarding her dating men -- that she was attracted to these secure and strong but sensitive emotional guys, but then she would discover they were nearly crippled or damaged underneath and needing to be supported by her. She preferred butch women who tended to have some of the similarities of these sensitive guys but were more emotionally alike to her.
You can see it in even femme gay guys -- that little cache of pig. ...but I'm not fooled by it..
yes, yes, I agree. The queeniest of men can often be the most mysoginistic and rigid gender authoritarians.
thanks for sharing your personal experiences and feelings. i'm definitely pomosexual -- especially since i get turned on talking about the things that turn me on. ha!
Re: Offer
Date: 2002-06-07 05:05 pm (UTC)Did I make you horny, Babee?
*lol*
But then there's that other side...
Date: 2002-06-07 08:15 pm (UTC)This reminds me a lot of something she told me once regarding her dating men -- that she was attracted to these secure and strong but sensitive emotional guys, but then she would discover they were nearly crippled or damaged underneath and needing to be supported by her. She preferred butch women who tended to have some of the similarities of these sensitive guys but were more emotionally alike to her.
Having had very few relationships, I'm going to say things like MANY of my relationships and it's going to mean, like two, but that's beyond the point.
I've often experienced the Let-me-make-you-happy phenomenon in dating women in general, and I hate hate hate it when any woman puts her own feelings aside, even if I'm the reason. For that reason, though, I've found myself happiest dating high femmes who are not going to let me get away with anything, and let me know exactly what is up. Of course, this could have a great deal to do with my complete inability to contain any of the dominance in a relationship. Basically, though I am a big fuzzy butch, I prefer to be the bitch of a relationship.
no subject
Date: 2002-06-07 04:37 pm (UTC)i'm very strongly physically and visually attracted to femmes. i haven't been able to handle being in relationships with them. we're just too different (in the bad conflict-y way, not the good interesting way) to be able to sustain anything past the first infatuation. i've only been able to be in good, lasting relationships with people who are fairly emotionally gender ambiguous. i can't really deal with butch personalities for long, either.