lff12

I enjoy posting on the UK Gingerbeer forums, which is a very nice forum for gay women (much nicer than the extremes of the Gaydar UK chatroom, which is like running a gauntlet - the transwomen are generally the nicest, which is interesting, considering they are more subject to abuse than anybody else on the site due to an increasing number of mentally ill straight male predators harassing women on the site lately).  Some time ago I posted a message asking if anybody else was heading to the Dinah Shore weekend in Palm Springs, CA, since I was aware that my planned travel companion might not be able to make it, for various reasons.  There were a few responses, much of them Orrore! at the perceived expensiveness of the event (actually love, try looking for any kind of accomodation in the Brighton area on pride weekend - I'll show you expensive!!) and one of two from people who'd actually made it to the event.

The Dinah, is of course, the most legendary social occasion in the US social calendar, made even more famous through the L-Word.  Now I think this particular event is most targetted at "big spenders" since clearly you can't really run a good explosive girlfest without blowing a bit of cash, contrary to what much of the old school dykes might like to continue to delude themselves with.  In fact the whole thing has mushroomed into at least 3 different "Dinahs", each geared towards a slightly different clientele - there is Maria Hansons celeb-fest, Rob Gans and Sandy Sachs more party orientated fest, there are even one or two more aimed a more traditional old-school kind of dyke.  Basically you can blow anything from $200 on a pass and get a cheap motel room out of town, or go all out and spend up to an eye watering $2500 dollars for Clubskirts premium package.  (Actually Girlbars offered a quite reasonable luxury VIP package with a pool view for a mere $1600!!)  Anyway one comment stood out....basically it suggested that the whole event was "body fascism."

Now I know recently I have commented on nearly being virtually torn apart by bulldykes on Gaydargirls chat room for mentioning that I'd no interest in women who wear male attire and style themselves like guys.  Sorry, but I make no apologies as I prefer WOMEN, not mock, pseudo blokes.  I just don't do that stereotype, I find it tired, dated and often contrived at best, laziness at worst.  I like a little thought, individuality and people with their own minds - I immediately leap when I see a profile on GD criticising people who take image into account - that is such rubbish since studies suggest that first impressions, mainly based on appearance and presentation, account fo 55% of how people take you.  And I really think that anybody who thinks they don't judge on appearance are self-deluded, if anything its increasingly refinding its feet, especially with younger women, who are no longer living in the cocoon of the closet, but out and proud. "Body fascism" is their mantra, a tired concept which I think most feminists realise now is just as oppressive as the male-gaze hetero equivalent.  Feminine women in GD are more likely to be accused of being what the Bulldykes describe as "trannies" (which says as much for their hatred of transpeople as it does for the very mentally sick men who choose to intrude onto this very much womens space to satify their sociopathic fantasies).  To be honest, I don't hate these weirdos who have worsened this blanket judgement of femme or very sexualized women on GD - I feel they are very sick men who need care for their mental illness, desipte the fact that its sold as a legitimate festish by the porn industry, which has of course, brainwashed a lot of former homophobes into believing that two girls together as "sexy"  - the only way in which the mentally unwell men who accept this can cope is by inserting themselves into a fantasy play.  To be honest I think this has probably harmed the mental health of a proportion of the male population (but no more so by promoting the belief in the mass availability of women to the most sad and pathetic lone masturbators of the world).

Anyway back to the bulldykes and their body fascism.  In a world where lesbians are now proven by more than one study to be twice as likely to be overweight, have a much higher incidence of heavy drinking, smoking and drug use, there is a sad level fo self delusion as to how this is and what it means.  Its very self deluded to believe that appearance means nothing.  A very beautiful newcomer appeared on the scene back here in the sticks last year.  I recall one of the comments was "handsome is as handsome does", which was interesting as it was noted that she was a particularly attractive woman despite the fact that this group would have found it very un-pc to acknowledge the part that appearance plays.  Another constant one is "I hate people who judge on appearance."  This is nonsense since most people take up some sort of position based on the appearance of others, not least because the presentation of ANY appearance sends nuanced messages.  This is the mistake of the "looks don't matter" brigade - in reality there is a message sent, albeit a difference one.

This is where there was an initial criticsm of the L-Word.  Originally a lot of women complained that it phsyically adorned the actresses involved in order to appeal to a voyeuristic (i.e. mentally ill) male audience.  They chose to ignore that it actually represented a more palatable to the straight population, but increasingly populous population of younger gay/bi women who no longer conformed into the stereotypical norms of the previous (but still politically dominant) generation of gay women.  I recall how a lot of the bulldykes hated trendy young nightclubs full of pretty young feminine women back at the end of the 90s - they repeatedly complained about everything - the venues, the music, anything.  It wasn't until Kiss for Girls took off though, a few years ago, that the real knives came out.  The sheer volume of hatred and prejudice was surprising.  It seems to me to be for two reasons: an assumption that the many feminine girls who came out to these events were "straight" (based on them not confirming to the stereotypical image favoured by the bulldykes), and the huge success of the event.  They probably would have not bothered too much if Kiss took up a niche position like similar clubs did in the past, but it became THE womens night, displacing any previous ones and firmly moving the "lipstick" cliche to the foreground  - which deeply threatened the entire power structure of the bulldykes.  To date there have been 2 serious efforts to discredit Kiss - the first the notorious (and now seemingly discredited) Kissygate incident, and secondly, an alleged assault a couple of years later, itself littered with references to the "kind of crowd" Kiss was attracting (showing the deep prejudice against "straight-acting" gay women and a reverse-snob assumption that they were not "real" gay women).  Happily it largely fell on deaf ears and such clubs not only have grown but now are starting to radically change the social makeup of the scene.

The trouble now is that there is still a huge dominance of the old school on the scene, and they are aware that they are losing their grip to a younger generation who are very different from them, a generation who like wearing high heels, makeup, and spending money.  A generation who are no longer "put upon" by a society that hates queers, a generation that demands better not only from the outside world, but from its own world.  Long may it last!