Em the Femme?

I told S a while ago that between biology class and the community, I was learning more new vocabulary than I knew what to do with. I was just reading an interesting post on being/not being Femme (http://sexgeek.wordpress.com/2009/05/09/on-not-being-femme/) and found myself questioning that identity as well, or maybe just the delineations of the definition. This year I have been reading an awful lot about what it means to be Femme or queer or genderqueer, and I find that some of it jars with me. Take, for example, the labeling of a person as a Femme because they happen to get regular pedicures, or some other such superficial habit. I don't-- in fact, I take pretty poor care of my feet and even just my nails in general. (I don't like the idea of paying someone to deal with my nasty feet, in a similar way to how I don't like paying to have 'maids'. I am not a slave-owner.)

I guess some of the things I take issue with might fit more under the definition of Femme in contrast with High Femme. SJ called me High Femme a while ago, and I questioned it even then. He said I was, even in my rain boots on his birthday. But to me, to slot myself into that cubby-hole is too limiting, and doesn't feel right. High Femme to me screams of high-maintenance, painful feet (not that I wouldn't wear heels if I didn't have this toe problem), and the same kind of dressing up for other people that I take issue with in the straight community. I think on some level I just need to hear a High Femme's definition of it, rather than the slightly negative vibes I've heard-- I just remember being at that queer party a while ago and hearing the host talk about how she can't stand High Femmes. I suppose from that I associated them with the kind of girl that I can't stand: superficial in both appearance and social matters. So you can imagine that I was not pleased to be called such a thing.

I am ready to be convinced otherwise, but even Sex Geek says something about Femmes being excited to talk about things like shoe shopping and 'beauty' procedures with passion. If that's the definition of a Femme, then I am most certainly not one: I like shoes, yes (even though I am doomed to wear these hiking boots until I wither away) and even like shopping on some level... but I like doing them, not talking about them. And even when I do them, I do a quick sweep-- if there is nothing I like, I'm out of there. I may be indecisive about a lot of things, but not about clothes. That's where my "Femme-ness" comes into play: I love to dress up. Not just dresses, either. I have always enjoyed a bit of genderfuck juxtaposition. Dresses with combat boots, short skirts and ties, etc. Or sometimes I will go full-out jeans, button-down, and tie-- with dangly earrings, of course (can't go without those.) In that way, I feel Femme: I feel powerful and sexy and like me when I am dressed up, when I have thought about what I'm wearing and am confident in it so that I don't give a shit what anyone else thinks about it. That, to me, is being Femme-- I don't need to be wearing a skirt or heels to feel feminine and empowered, I can be Femme with my short hair and butch hiking boots, with my unmanicured nails, with no dangly earrings. But in the end, whether I fit other people's definition of Femme or not, I am me and I am getting comfortable in my own skin-- and that's all that really matters.

This takes the cake

I have much I could say. But for right now, I just want to direct your attention to this beautiful post: http://dorothysurrenders.blogspot.com/2009/04/my-weekend-crush_17.html

Like a real life teddy bear... with a brain

{Q, whilst we were discussing what animal Dr.W should be-- we settled on an Ewok, even though [or maybe because] it's a fictitious creature, because nothing else seemed equally friendly, smart, and cute.}

Today in the computer room (where so much "studying" goes on-- read: gossip and sharing of hilarious youtube videos), the subject of Seth Rogen came up. I, being the entertainment black hole that I am (ie. I know nothing), did not know that he had lost a bunch of weight. Neither, it seems, did M, so we both looked up pictures to see what Q and JP were talking about. They said something about him looking 'almost too skinny' (whatever the hell that means.) Think about this: a few weeks ago, the same people were talking about Eliza Dushku as though she could have stood to lose those 10 pounds or so she allegedly dropped for Dollhouse to look "smoking". Does this not strike anyone else as a bit of a doozy? It's well known that society perceives it to be perfectly all right to be male and overweight (successful, etc.), and when he loses weight (for the Green Hornet movie he's going to make) it's not very long before there's talk of him getting close to being 'too skinny' and that he looked better with some chub. (NB: there are also plenty of other responses saying that he 'looks great now' and even that he could stand to lose a few more.) But overall? He lost a lot of weight, yes, but he's nowhere near the emaciation that is considered standard or even chubby for a woman in the same business. Tina Fey also lost a shitload of weight before she became a big hooha. Now excuse me, but that fucks me off. I really don't get this fetishistic idolization of skeletal, pre-pubescent women. I don't even get it in the depths of my eating disorder-- I never wanted to be like that, I always wanted to be strong and healthy; my body type is just such that the weight that I was aiming for to be that was also to the point on scarily skinny. I have a large frame (on occasion I will jokingly call it Amazonian) and so I will never be a size 0 or even a size 6. But you know what? I am sick of feeling like I need to squeeze into whatever size society deems "acceptable" to be categorized as thin. I am life-sized.