1 / 11

‘Masculinity’ in lesbian discourse? The case of butch and femme

‘Masculinity’ in lesbian discourse? The case of butch and femme. Lucy Jones lucy.jones@hull.ac.uk. Introduction. Can ‘masculinity’ exist in isolation from men? Is what lesbian women do in conversation really ‘masculinity’?

dino
Télécharger la présentation

‘Masculinity’ in lesbian discourse? The case of butch and femme

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. ‘Masculinity’ in lesbian discourse? The case of butch and femme Lucy Jones lucy.jones@hull.ac.uk

  2. Introduction • Can ‘masculinity’ exist in isolation from men? • Is what lesbian women do in conversation really ‘masculinity’? • Conversation between a community of practice (CoP) of lesbian women • AIMS: unpick the indexical links between apparently ‘butch’ behaviour and hegemonic ‘masculinity’

  3. Butch identity and masculinity (1) • ‘Mannish’  ‘butch’ • Butch is “a category of lesbian gender that is constituted through the deployment and manipulation of masculine gender codes and symbols” (Rubin 1992: 467) • Achieved through the use of “masculine identifiers” (Inness 1997: 185) • Shows women “disrupting and decentering heterosexual masculinity” (Wilton 1995: 104)

  4. Butch identity and masculinity (2) • Gender order: non-feminine = acting like a man • Butch: acting like a man? Or acting like a lesbian? • Masculinity: being a man • Competition and hierarchy (Kiesling 1997, 2002) • Heterosexuality (Pujolar 1997) • Misogny (Bucholtz 1999) • “animated by entirely traditional anxieties about being seen at all times as red-blooded heterosexual males: not women and not queers.” (Cameron 1997: 62)

  5. Theoretical framework • Lesbian women found to use lesbian stereotypes to construct shared, meaningful identity (Morgan and Wood 1995, Queen 2005, Morrish and Sauntson 2007, Jones 2011) • Sociocultural linguistics (Bucholtz & Hall 2005): • Identities are constructed in interaction; stereotypes and ideologies are reworked within that interaction • Personae constructed within interaction – relevant to shared experience (ethnographic level) and broader sociocultural context

  6. The Sapphic Stompers • British lesbian hiking group: typically women in their late fifties to early sixties, feminists, identified as butch or androgynous • Jones (in press): the women used discursive strategies to position themselves and others in line with ‘authentic’ or ‘illegitimate’ personae that they themselves constructed • Dyke (authentic) or Girl (inauthentic) • The interaction: • Claire, Marianne, Sam and Lucy (Author) • Makeup negotiated re: construction of authentic lesbian identity

  7. Rejecting lipstick • Collaborative stance against makeup • Generational experience • Positions makeup as an inauthentic resource for lesbians of their generation (lines 4-6) • Queering heteronormative concept of lipstick • Unattractive rather than sexually appealing (line 9) • Clear distinction between lesbian women and straight women • Lipstick: accessible symbol of heteronormative femininity

  8. Shifting stances towards authenticity • Marianne’s attempt to shift the group’s stance • Use of hedging • Failure to change the group stance; shifts her own stance • Lipstick is ‘quite nice actually’ (line 19)  lipstick is ‘a bit horrible actually’ (line 26) • Why does Marianne’s attempt fail? • Strong ideological link between makeup and femininity • Strong link between makeup and patriarchy • Reveals the salience of rejecting symbols of heteronormative femininity in the construction of a butch identity.

  9. Indexing a butch persona • Claire (line 21 onwards): • ‘Put your foot down’ • Indexes dykey/butch persona • Direct index: domineering/controlling • Indirect index: butch, in contrast to femme • Draws on prevalent ideologies of masculinity and femininity to construct a specifically lesbianstance: • Masculinity may have an indexical relationship to butch, but not necessarily a direct correlation

  10. Conclusions • Butch is about more than taking on masculine signifiers or role-playing a male identity • Butch is an alternative style of womanhood • Butch is not a non-female identity • One can reject femininity without rejecting femaleness • Masculinity is about all things associated with hegemonic manliness, • Butch is about all things associated with stereotypical lesbianism. • Butch is a valuable resource for queer identity construction

  11. ‘Masculinity’ in lesbian discourse? The case of butch and femme Lucy Jones lucy.jones@hull.ac.uk

More Related