Feminist separatism, sometimes referred to as lesbian separatism/’political lesbianism’, is a branch of feminism, originating in the latter half of the 20th century, that poses the theory that feminist opposition to the patriarchy can only be achieved through women’s separation from men.

This is a controversial theory, however, for several reasons.

Firstly, the implications of suggesting that one can simply ‘choose’ to be lesbian is akin to homophobia.

The ‘political’ lesbian shares the same energy and headspace as the “same-sex attraction is a temptation you can choose to avoid” Christian. It perpetuates the idea that lesbians are choosing to be with women and can easily change their minds (they can’t).

Lesbianism as a ‘political strategy’

‘If it is something that we can choose to be, then surely it is something that we can also choose not to be?…’

Sexuality is not a choice. You cannot conflate something that is a fact (like being a lesbian) with a political choice.

Women who call themselves ‘lesbians’ because they have decided that they want nothing to do with men, and not because they are only sexually attracted to women, trivialise and disrespect our experiences, when sexuality, and the feeling of who we’re attracted to, are not things that we can control.

Another reason why lesbian separatism is controversial is due to the demonisation of men that subscribing to such a radical theory demands.

Lesbian separatism implies that one can simply ‘choose’ to become a lesbian, regardless of the presence of same-sex desire, solely because they perceive men as being ‘unsafe’, having depicted them as the enemy.*

*(As a pamphlet written in 1979 states, feminists who sleep with men are ‘collaborating with the enemy.’)

It’s not men who are the enemy though, it’s the patriarchy.

Alas, lesbian separationists hate men more than they love women…

A bisexual woman forcing herself to only date women, for example, will only lead to self-hate and internalised biphobia, thus causing women to become the collateral of the very thing that they are fighting against- a lack of freedom over their own lives.

A person’s sexuality should not be labelled based on who they hate, but rather, based on who they love.

Why do some feminists hate men so much?

Some feminist separatists believe that men cannot make positive contributions to the feminist movement and that even well-intentioned men replicate the dynamics of the patriarchy.

While it cannot be argued that the patriarchy is real and rife in society, it can (and should) be argued that oppression isn’t just ‘in every man’s nature’, as some radical feminists would have us believe

Masculinity is in every man’s nature, yes, (to varying degrees, granted) but that is not what we are fighting against. We are fighting against toxic masculinity, and its associations that men have been socialised into believing are synonymous with masculinity (but they really aren’t).

If they were, then why would some women proudly state that they are ‘anti-feminist’?

Why would women want to distance themselves from the cause?

I’ll tell you why. Because it’s not just a male-to-female issue, it’s a societal issue.

Just consider the reaction to the feminist movement by, not only men, but other women too.

‘Hysterical.’

‘Mad.’

‘She’s got a screw loose.’

Women who are simply asking for the right to be seen as equal are often brandished as being ‘bra-burning, man-hating’ lesbians.

How dare you rebel against the status quo!!

In the same way that lesbian separatism argues that lesbianism is socially constructed when it is actually just how some women are born, feminist separatism also argues that being the oppressor that upholds the patriarchy is just how some men are born when it is actually socially constructed, as the above example proves when women can be just as dismissive of other women as men.

In theory, and in practice, it just doesn’t make sense…

Advocating withdrawal from working, personal, and casual relationships with men, ‘the practice of separatism is the only way to escape domination’, is what is claimed. But rationally, we know this to be untrue.

A room full of men who have been brought up being told that they are the ‘superior’ sex over women will continue to move through life in such a way that upholds this rhetoric, their male peers only serving to confirm and encourage this mindset since they too hold the same values.

If all women disengage from men, refusing to so much as talk to them, then how can men be educated?

Misandry won’t solve misogyny, education will.

Focusing on the differences between men and women, however well-meaning, will only serve to maintain, and even exasperate, our differences…

How can we hope for the emergence of a ‘new man’ when we haven’t told the old ones where they’re going wrong?

Feminist separatism risks defining itself by what it separates itself from.

The fact is that women’s rights will never be secured by excluding men from feminism. We must educate boys to do better so that we don’t need a feminist movement in the first place…

We must encourage boys to look inwards, to practice self-awareness so that they can recognise the source of their need to control women, that source being the oppressive forces that govern them.

As in the phrase, ‘hurt people hurt people’, it’s such a cliche because it’s so true.

The source of all oppression, not just of women but of every other marginalised group in society, from ethnic minorities to the working class to disabled people, is due to feeling out of control in a society that demands so much of us yet gives so little to us.

And this is another reason why lesbian separatism is dangerous. Lumping all men together leaves the marginalised subject to the same oppression that we are supposedly fighting against.

Women aren’t the only victims of oppression.

Political lesbianism overlooks the fact that domestic abuse can occur in same-sex relationships too when, to reiterate the point again, the issue lies not with men, but with toxic masculinity. And where masculinity is not exclusive to men, women can be both the victim and the perpetrator of toxic masculinity, too.

A good book that pinpoints the occurrence of abusive lesbian relationships is ‘In The Dream House’ by Carmen Maria Machado, pictured below.

As Machado wrote following the release of In The Dream House, ‘the LGBTQ community needs to have an honest conversation about domestic abuse and to admit we’re in the muck like everyone else.’

There is a belief that abuse is about sexism, but it’s not. Abuse is about power and control.

In fact, the rates of domestic abuse in same-sex relationships, whether lesbian or gay, are roughly the same as domestic abuse against heterosexual women (25%).

And what about other marginalised groups?

‘Isolate all men from women to abolish the patriarchy’, lesbian separatists say, but what about black men? Working-class men? Disabled men? Gay men who face the same oppression as women for something that they can’t change?…

We can’t just demand equality, we need to practice it.

When the world will only be free once we are all free, we cannot leave people behind otherwise the oppression will continue… 

To turn our back on it, to turn a blind eye to the injustices that we know are going on in the world would make us just as bad as the oppressor, for we would be complicit in the abuse.

The only way that we can achieve a future in which equality exists is by coming together as a collective to demand change.

We should not only be feminists, but anarchists, in opposition to ALL unequal relationships of power.

As two expressions of the same system of oppression, the only way to dismantle the patriarchy is to dismantle the state.

Instead of campaigning to isolate men, we should be campaigning against the system that causes us to want to isolate men, the patriarchy.

What causes men to feel the need to exert control over women?

Society.

Anarcha-feminism is therefore the only way forward. We must come together to address the intersecting issues of misogyny and homophobia, poverty and racism, and reproductive rights so that we can all be free.

We must take a stance against all systems of oppression.

The patriarchy is a result of deeper-rooted problems, and swapping out misogyny for misandry is not the way to solve those problems…

Hate can­not dri­ve out hate; only love can do that.
– Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

In a world of polarities, where all we’re taught is black and white, Stone Butch Blues adds to what we know is really a rainbow.

How we choose to live in our bodies and our hearts is much more than a Dick-and-Jane reality.

---

Yesterday I read the Leslie Feinberg (1949–2014) novel, ‘Stone Butch Blues’ (1993), and all I can say is, WOW.

(Note: I will be using the acronym ‘SBB’ interchangeably throughout this review, which stands for the book title, Stone Butch Blues).

If you haven’t already read SBB, it’s one to be added to your to-be-read pile, with a fast-track pass straight to the top.

Considered a cult classic in LGBT communities, and rightfully so, Stone Butch Blues is a groundbreaking novel exploring the complexities of gender.

The novel, although sitting in the fiction category, (it was written from the perspective of a fictional character, a stone-butch lesbian named Jess Goldberg), is largely inspired by Feinberg (pictured below) and her own lived experiences as a working-class butch lesbian in late 20th-century New York.

Strangers who stare — their eyes angry, confused, intrigued. Woman or man: they are outraged that I confuse them. The only recognition I can find in their face is that I am ‘other.’ I am different.

I didn’t want to be different though. I longed to be everything grownups wanted, so they would love me. I followed all their rules and tried my best to please. But there was something about me that made them knit their eyebrows and frown. No one ever offered a name for what was wrong with me. That’s what made me afraid it was really bad. I only came to recognise its melody through this constant refrain: 

“Is that a boy or a girl?”

Similarly to Feinberg’s own struggle to be accepted in society as a butch lesbian, frustrated by her gender non-conformity, Jess’ parents, the protagonist in Stone Top Blues, had her admitted to a psychiatric ward.

This was common in the 50’s at a time when homosexuality was still illegal.

Upon leaving the hospital, Jess moved to New York.

First stop? A gay bar.

It was there that Jess met Butch Al and Jacqueline who took her under their wing, offering Jess a place to stay and teaching her about lesbian culture.

Finding her place in the lesbian community didn’t, however, come without struggle (and lots of it).

Gay bars were frequently subject to raids which saw Jess and her fellow queers being arrested, beaten, and raped by corrupt cops.

After multiple rapes at the hands of police, as a means to survive, having had enough of the world punishing her for being an unconventional woman, Jess decided to become a man.

Her partner Theresa, however, disapproved and they broke up as a result.

Being with Jess saw Theresa being subject to ridicule at feminist meetings, where other women would treat her love of butches as a betrayal of the feminist cause.

This is a narrative that we still see happening today in some cases, by people who view masculinity per/se as toxic, instead of identifying the real source of toxicity which lies in the patriarchy.

Unlike in heterosexual relationships, in lesbian relationships, there is no superior/inferior dynamic at play (or at least, there shouldn’t be). Even when the relationship is between a more masculine presenting woman and a more feminine presenting woman, the relationship isn’t governed by the same oppressive forces that all too often govern heterosexual relationships between men and women.

All I remembered was Jacqueline’s warning: You could make a woman feel real good with it or you could make her remember all the ways she’s ever been hurt …

Having been a ‘stone butch’ with her first partner, Angie, a femme sex worker, ‘the way I shut down emotionally when I feel scared and hurt and helpless and say funny little things that seem so out of context’, being with Theresa saw Jess softening her stony exterior.

Alas, following their breakup, Jess began taking testosterone, got chest reconstruction surgery, and began to pass as a male and escape from male violence.

While relieved to be safer in public, feeling exiled from womanhood and fearing her loss of visibility as a lesbian only added to Jess’s loneliness and she later went on to de-transition.

This part of the novel reminds us of the complexities of gender, and how gender identity and gender expression do not always align.

‘I can’t believe you’ve given me the sky to sleep under. But I can’t tell if it’s dawn or dusk you’ve painted.”
She smiled up at the ceiling. “It’s neither. It’s both. Does that unnerve you?”
I nodded slowly. “Yeah, in a funny way, it does.”
‘I figured that’, she said. 
‘It’s a place inside of me I have to accept.’

Masculinity is not inseparable from men as femininity is not inseparable from women. Being masculine doesn’t make a woman any less of a woman if that is her gender identity.

“Is that a girl or a man?”
Joan flashed me an apologetic expression and turned back to Amy.
‘That’s Jess’, she said.

‘I don’t want another label. I just wish we had words so pretty we’d go out of our way to say them out loud.’

As the novel closes, Jess feels her life coming full circle. She enters into a relationship with her new neighbour, Ruth, a trans woman, and her fear is replaced with hope.

From butch and femme relationships to butch and butch relationships to transgender he/him lesbians, Feinberg does an incredible job of showcasing the beauty and tenderness of lesbian desire. So much so that I got through the book in just two days.

I was entranced.

Never had I felt more proud to be queer than upon reading about the struggle that we, as a community, have had to endure over the years simply for not conforming to the societally imposed norms surrounding gender and sexuality.

Never have I felt more seen.

It was a hard read, dealing with themes of rape and homophobia, as one can expect in a novel of this nature, but it was also filled with so many beautiful reminders of hope.

Beautiful reminders of our power, something that can never be taken away from us. 

When even despite being at the receiving end of rape and death threats, we still didn’t, we still don’t let their hate towards us overpower our love for each other, what can be more inspiring than this?

Stone Butch Blues: A book about crossing boundaries and seeking home.

In 2012, Feinberg, whose last words were ‘remember me as a revolutionary communist’, recovered the rights to Stone Butch Blues. 

Having made the decision to not sign any new contracts, Feinberg instead declared that the story would be ‘given back to the workers and oppressed of the world.’

And true to her word, a PDF of Stone Butch Blues is available for free to anyone with internet access HERE.

The present and past are the trajectory of the future, but the arc of history does not bend toward justice automatically. As the great Abolitionist Frederick Douglass observed, ‘without struggle, there is no progress…’

That’s what the characters in Stone Butch Blues fought for.

The last chapter of this saga of struggle has not yet been written.

I want you to take a moment out of your day to ask yourself the following:

Why do I feel the need to label myself? Am I doing it to make myself feel more comfortable, or am I doing it to make other people feel less uncomfortable?

---

We have seemingly done a 360 as a society when it comes to self-expression and how we define it (if we define it).

In the late 70s, as Glam Rock gained in popularity, we had the likes of David Bowie and his alter ego, the ‘androgynous alien’ that was Ziggy Stardust. 

We had Robert Smith, frontman of The Cure. 

We had Freddie Mercury and Elton John, Lou Reed and Patti Smith, Prince and Billy Idol, all of whom were challenging gender (non)conformity, and unapologetically so.

‘Are you a transvestite or a homosexual?’
“Sometimes.”
‘Which one?’
“I don’t know, what’s the difference?”
– In conversation with Lou Reed, 1972.

Glam rock, centred on boundary-pushing performances, showed us all a new way to live that was unphased by the constraints of gender. Widening the possibilities for multi-faceted and fragmented identities for everyone, it created a community that was undeterred by the societal imposed pressures to fit into a box.’Glam rock, centred on boundary-pushing performances, showed us all a new way to live that was unphased by the constraints of gender. Widening the possibilities for multi-faceted and fragmented identities for everyone, it created a community that was undeterred by the societal imposed pressures to fit into a box.

‘Male?’
(no).

‘Female?’
(no).

Androgynous alien.

While we were celebrating diversity in the media, through film, (think The Rocky Horror Show), and music, (think Bowie), in society at large, subverting gender binaries and resisting labels in a world that demands them made for, not only an uncomfortable life due to the threat of unwanted stares, but also a dangerous one due to the threat of violence.

As was highlighted in Leslie Feinberg’s revolutionary novel, Stone Butch Blues, police raids on mid-twentieth-century queer bars regularly led to the arrest of butch lesbians, trans women, and gay men in drag for violating cross-dressing* law.

*(Cross-dressing, ‘wearing a dress not belonging to his or her sex’, was illegal in the 1900s, ‘too much of a threat’).

Hard to believe that it was illegal then for a woman to wear trousers, or for two women or two men to sway to music together…

Firsthand accounts of these raids describe police enforcing a “three items of clothing” rule that required people to wear three articles of gender-appropriate clothing or face arrest.

The crime?

‘The subversion of established gendered and sexual categories of male and female, masculine and feminine, heterosexual and homosexual; its capacity to undermine social hierarchy, gender order, and the rigid contemporary boundaries of acceptable sexual conduct.’

It’s all about control (male on female), where it is often difficult, if not impossible, to untangle masculinity from the oppression of women, as social structures wed masculinity to maleness, and maleness to power and domination.

It is for this reason that stereotypes relating to lesbian relationships exist.

‘Who’s the man?’

When what you’re really being asked is:
‘Who’s the oppressor?’

Seemingly, there must be a man in every relationship, even when the whole point of the relationship is that there is no man, because who else would reproduce misogyny?

It’s all about control.

‘A cop knelt and kissed the feet of a priest, and a queer threw up at the sight of that.’

It’s all about capitalism.

When does self-expression stop being for one’s self and become an act for everyone else?…

‘Self-expression’ should be for ourselves, a clue in the name, ‘SELF-expression…’ Yet it has become something political, something that must be definable where it is not enough for people to just be anymore…

‘What are your pronouns?’
(Why does it matter)?

‘Human.’

We’re all human beings going through the same experience, the ‘self’ being an invention of a society that is priming us to become perfectly passive.

In such a society, we are expected to conform to the stereotypes and normative standards that are fed to us via agents of capitalism and consumerism daily, for gender nonconformity poses a threat to the status quo…

When we comply, when we neatly fit into the box of either masculine or feminine, we are easy to manipulate and control with targeted marketing campaigns.

We buy ‘X’ if we’re female, and ‘Y’ if we’re male.

We are marketable.

When we resist authority, however, when we begin to forge our own way via the queer desire to disobey and disregard, not so much…

Strangers, their eyes angry and confused, stare.

Heads turning when I walk down the street, ‘Woman or man?’, they are outraged that I confuse them. The only recognition I can find in their face is that I am ‘other.’ 

I am ‘different.‘

And because we’ve been taught to hate people who are different, it has been pumped into our brains, it keeps everybody fighting each other.

As Judith Butler, the American philosopher and gender studies scholar notes, however, such hate is completely misguided when ‘gender is a performance, where the attributes of masculinity and femininity are merely ideological mechanisms that are assigned to biological sex by society, rather than being innate.’

“Is that a girl or a man?”
Joan flashed me an apologetic expression and turned back to Amy.
‘That’s Jess’, she said.

Gender = self-expression, not anatomy.

The reality is that masculinity extends far beyond the male body, as femininity extends beyond the female body.

Therefore, when people question why you want to ‘look like a man’, ask them, ‘Why is it so hard for you to see me as a woman?’

What is it about seeing a powerful woman that makes you feel so uncomfortable?

The assumption that women are the weaker sex is one that is upheld by the patriarchy which is designed to keep men in positions of superiority and women in positions of inferiority.

If a young girl expresses a desire to wear boys’ clothes, she’s just a ‘tomboy’, ‘it’s just a phase.’ If a young boy wants to wear girls’ clothes, however… It’s a different story, proof that female gender deviance is much more tolerated than male gender deviance (and unsurprisingly so)…

When masculinity comes with enormous social privilege:

Male femininity = loss of value
Female masculinity = elevated status

Why would any boy want to be a girl?
Why would any girl not want to be a boy?

Fuelling exactly the type of small-mindedness that sees toxic masculinity thriving, we have a misconstrued idea of what constitutes masculinity, having been predominantly shown examples of toxic masculinity in the media and society at large growing up.

What is the use of being a little boy if you are growing up to be a man?
– Gertrude Stein.

Alas, toxic masculinity isn’t masculinity per/se, as women prove in their depictions of masculinity. 

(As in butch lesbians, for example).

Defying the ‘man’-made boundaries of gender…

Performing strength without being violent, and ‘sexiness’ without being predatory, butchness is the audacious rejection of the male gaze — a not-so-subtle middle finger to male dominance and its stifling grip around the confines of what womanhood should be.

A free-floating aspect of identity, gender should be assumed by choice rather than being culturally enforced.

‘We’re all born naked and the rest is drag.’

We are assigned our sex at birth, our gender too based on stereotypes of what it means to be a girl and what it means to be a boy, but as we grow older, some people sustain it while others subvert it as they recreate their gender along the way.

He/him/his for someone who identifies as male.
She/her/hers for someone who identifies as female.
They/them/their for someone who identifies as neither male nor female.

We learn to occupy this space we call home along the way.

I have been locked by the lawless.
Handcuffed by the haters.
Gagged by the greedy.
And, if I know anything at all,
it’s that a wall is just a wall
and nothing more at all.
It can be broken down.
– I believe in living, Assata Shakur.

Learning to enjoy life in all its multifacetedness, I embrace masculinity and femininity and everything in between.

‘I don’t want another label. I just wish we had words so pretty we’d go out of our way to say them out loud.’

Genderqueer, fixed in the undefinable, enjoying the performance of gender on the stage that is life, I am human, having become as concerned with the pronoun ‘we’ as I am with the pronouns ‘she’ and ‘he.’

Why can’t society just let us all be human?

Is that not enough?

‘I can’t believe you’ve given me the sky to sleep under. But I can’t tell if it’s dawn or dusk you’ve painted.’
She smiled up at the ceiling. ‘It’s neither. It’s both. Does that unnerve you?’
I nodded slowly. ‘Yeah, in a funny way, it does.’
‘I figured that’, she said. ‘It’s a place inside of me I have to accept.’

She/he/they
(indifferent).

Human.

Je ne sais quoi.

---

Recommended reading:

• Stone Butch Blues, Leslie Feinberg
• Transgender Liberation, Leslie Feinberg (read the pamphlet for free here).
• Female Masculinity, Judith (Jack) Halberstam
• Gender Trouble, Judith Butler