It’s LGBT History Month1
(February) but also the year we commemorate 100 years since women were given
the vote. So it’s a fitting time to appreciate the contribution of LGBT+ to
feminism. Sandy Toksvig, who bravely came out in 1994, despite this making her
the only well-known lesbian in the UK entertainment industry at the time, has
hugely contributed to feminism, not least by co-founding the Women’s Equality
Party2 with Catherine Mayer. Feminism also has LGBT+ women of colour
to thank and should take the time to celebrate them, not just during LGBT and
Black History month, but all year round. Audre Lorde, whose famous and wise
quote “Your silence will not protect you”3 was at the forefront of
many fights against any and all injustices, including not only sexism, racism and
homophobia but also ageism, classism and any other forms of injustice in
society. She was an early exponent of what we now call intersectionality, so helping
future feminists to understand the interplay between different forms of
oppression alongside sexism and how they are all form a part of an overall
system of oppression.
Nevertheless, despite LGBT+
making huge contributions to feminism, there is a complex relationship between
the two. Feminists can be negative about gay people being in their movement
because, rather like the tennis world, liberal feminists believe them to be a ‘lavender
menace’4, who add to the image that all feminists are lesbians. This
image, among other stereotypes about feminists, apparently, can put off
straight women from wanting to identify as feminists. To my mind, this simply
means that straight feminists are ironically guilty of the hypocrisy of arguing
against prejudice against women whilst, at the same time, displaying that exact,
same prejudice towards their own (their lesbian sisters). Feminists cannot
plausibly argue against bias and discrimination towards them, while displaying it
themselves towards certain groups of women. This insulting phrase, ‘lavender
menace’, coined by Friedan (1969), one of the founders of NOW (National
Organisation for Women), has thankfully been turned into a positive by being re-appropriated
by lesbian feminists. Lavender Menace was used as a name for an informal group of
radical lesbian feminists to object to excluding lesbians and lesbian concerns from
feminist debates in the USA (1970). Their protests were successful and within a
year the NOW declared lesbian rights as part of the feminist movement. Hence,
this should no longer be an issue but, sadly, I think it is, as Victoria Brownworth
writes in February 2013:
“The culture of lesbian erasure
that has flourished in the past few years has become deeply and disturbingly
entrenched in straight, liberal feminism.”
This is one of the reasons why
the suffragette movement is interesting because not only did it cross all
social groups and class but it also included straight, gay and bisexual women.
One such woman was the radical suffragette, Emmeline Pankhurst, founder of the
WSPU, who was once married to Richard Pankhurst, (one of a very rare breed of
men supportive of women’s suffrage). But Emmeline was also bi-sexual. She met
and formed a close bond with the lesbian composer Ethel Smyth who joined the
movement and composed their anthem.
For more on this see the LGBT
History Month factsheet on Emmeline:
Why is this significant? Because
it shows that it’s not unusual for women to form very close bonds with other
women at whatever age and whatever the age gap, whether they were both once married to a man or
not or whether one of them has always lived as a lesbian. As in the above
example, Emmeline was once married, Ethel wasn’t because she had always lived
as a lesbian. It’s impossible to know for sure whether Emmeline was bi-sexual
or whether she was a lesbian but, either way, she may very well have been gay.
Gay women have married men for a
variety of personal reasons. Those who identify as lesbian often do so as a
result of pressure to be heterosexual and societal bias. A modern example of
this is perhaps Portia deRossi a well-known actress, who identifies as a
lesbian but whose fear of ‘coming out’ as one, resulted in her marrying a man
(1996-9). Later she married the famous US talk show host and comedienne, Ellen
DeGeneres, who also identifies as a lesbian but has never been married to a man.
Portia’s heterosexual marriage didn’t last. This modern example sheds light on
a further complexity, namely, just because a woman is married or has been
married to a man, does not automatically mean she is heterosexual. She can
indeed be a lesbian. Or, as already discussed, bi-sexual. Those who identify as
bi-sexual women may choose to be married to a man at some point in their lives
but their other partner/s may have included women. A famous example is the Mexican
artist, Frida Kahlo, who although married to Diego Rivera, had many affairs
with women. Once civil partnerships and gay marriage became legal, some
bisexuals have chosen to be married to a woman after having been married to a
man.
Three examples of ‘out’
bi-sexuals are: Debra Kolodny, a bi-sexual rights activist rabbi; Sheela
Lambert, a writer and bi-sexual rights activist, co-founder of BiWriters Assoc
and co-founder for Bi Women of All Colours; and the pop singer, Lady Gaga who is
openly bi-sexual.
Although some feel the term bi-sexual
captures their identity, other members of the LGBT+ community prefer to
identify as pansexual, to convey their love for people irrespective of their sex
or gender identity. All this shows that it is important not to jump to
conclusions or be quick to judge people’s sexual identities, preferences and
choices of partner. There are many different factors, both personal and
societal, which impact on their life choices throughout their lives and we need
to respect, be understanding and empathetic towards everyone and the identity
they feel they are, including their personal decisions and lifestyles.
Nevertheless, bi-sexuality is
something that can still be overlooked in the narrow stereotyping of who is
part of the gay community. This was made even more complex in the early part of
the twentieth century when being gay was not talked about openly, and is only relatively
recently being addressed by examining the problem of biphobia more closely and
supporting bi-visibility. So far in my
blog posts on LGBT+ History Month, I’ve tended to focus on lesbians:
But, I think, it’s important to
discuss and bring out the complexity of being bi-sexual because this group can
often suffer from biphobia and be left feeling side-lined and not believed. Biphobia
also means they can even be stereotyped as a ‘having their cake and eat it’
group and mis-labelled promiscuous. I hope in this blog post I’ve shown the
importance of increasing the visibility of bi-sexual people (which is one of
the aims of LGBT History Month, and is reinforced by Bi Visibility Day5
on the 23rd September) as well as dispelling some of the myths
surrounding them, both within feminism and generally in society. It also,
hopefully, increases awareness of so-called hidden/silenced lesbianism/bisexuality
within conventional marriage(s) and raises the concern that trying to force gay
people into heterosexual relationships/marriages doesn’t work, and can cause
considerable harm to all.
1For more details see: http://lgbthistorymonth.org.uk/about/
3 for this quote, more
on Audre Lorde and other LGBT activists see:
4 for more, see:
Comments
Post a Comment