Women's Culture Women s Space/The Margins

The , Healthcare by Women for Women Since 1972, closes its doors this month.  It is one of only 13 feminist women s health centers  remaining in the country.  It ran out of money.

   Aradia has always served poor women, with doctors and other health care professionals volunteering their time.  Now, too many women are without health care insurance.  The past five years has seen 20 percent rise in low-income women seeking abortions at Aradia, probably because they do not have access to birth control.

This is such a loss for women!  Aradia stood for women caring for women, for women s liberation and full humanity.  How many clinics do we have to lose, how many rape crisis centers and domestic violence shelters will be co-opted or closed down or taken over by the Religious Right before we realize what we have lost as women, how successful men s resistance to and fight against feminism and women has been?

It’s a cramped space set below street level. Faded purple carpets and narrow hallways branch off into small examination rooms, office space and labs. Classical music plays in the halls.

For now.
But they’ll soon be empty.
Aradia Women’s Health Center, a First Hill nonprofit organization with a feminist point of view, has faced protesters, debt, several moves and a lot of change over the years.

Recently it confronted an even more potent threat: a lack of funding coupled with rising costs. This financial crisis will soon take its toll. In January, after 34 years of service, one of Seattle’s first abortion clinics and women’s health centers will close its doors permanently.

“We’re calling it the perfect storm,” says Karen Besserman, vice president of the board of directors. Over the last two years Aradia’s insurance provider tripled the cost of malpractice coverage. Most of the clinic’s clients are low-income women -70 percent up from 50 percent five years ago - and Medicaid subsidies simply did not cover costs.

Donations from local individuals have stayed consistent and account for 10 percent of the clinic’s funding. The rest comes directly from clinic services.
Aradia was created in 1972 by a group of women at the University of Washington’s YWCA.

The Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade legalized abortion a year later, and in 1977 Aradia incorporated the procedure into its general gynecological care program. It has served 54,000 clients and stayed true to its original mission of care for women by women, together with reproductive advocacy and education.

The clinic has been at its current site, 1300 Spring St., for 10 years.
Here the organization’s eight health care advocates, a nurse, a physician’s assistant and nine doctors, provide abortions, birth control counseling, annual exams and testing for sexually transmitted diseases.

At Aradia, health care advocates receive intensive training that takes three months. They screen and talk to clients, take their health care histories and also do some lab work. “It’s quite intimate,” says Rose.

They stay with clients during abortions and afterward take them to the recovery room with its recliners, heating pads and scent of peppermint. “We’re there so that they are not alone,” says Rose. That kind of one-on-one care was one of the things no one at Aradia wanted to give up.

The board considered other options aside from closing, such as merging with a larger organization, becoming just an abortion clinic or purely an advocacy group. But, says Newman, none of the options would “retain the essence of Aradia.” Roughly 20 employees are being laid off.

Bloom feels certain they will go on to continue Aradia’s mission, “with the brand of feminist health care on their souls.”
“It’s a sign of the times,” says Bloom. The federal government does not fund abortion.

Washington state subsidizes it through Medicaid but those reimbursements are too low, says Aradia staff. As fewer Americans have insurance, independent non-profit clinics like Aradia are unable to cover the rising costs of service. Abortion is on the decline nationwide, except among low-income women, something Bloom feels is due to their lack of insurance and access to birth control.

Since moderation issues are on my mind, I decided to lighten things up a bit and present the Best of the Peanut Gallery, comprised of excerpts from some of the comments men have attempted to post to Women s Space over the last 30 days or so.   It is an interesting mix; I hope you laugh as hard over some of the comedic attempts at commentary as I did!  That way, the disturbing commentary might not be quite so burdensome.

Im a man. I searched for Brit’s crotch and I found this site. I love the site and the discussion.

It’s haunted me and Ive since had discussions about it with my feminist wife who has majored in women’s studies and I guess has tolerated my point of view all this time. I always thought of myself as a feminist, but maybe Im not. My wife is angry with me because of my counter arguments.

This missive isnt about Brit’s crotch but maybe it is. Because I found this site due to my curiosity…
To the women of this site, I ask: What is the definition of feminine minus the polution of the male point of view? When I say “feminine”, Im talking about sexuality and the projection of such.

Im not talking about equality across the board, which I believe wholeheartedly in.
What do the women who contribute to this blog find acceptable when it comes to sexuality, the appearance of sexuality and the response to said sexuality?
Please, Im not trolling here…
Maybe if he knocks it off with the aggravating anti-feminist  counter arguments he is evidently making when his feminist wife takes him to task over his internet searches for Britney Spears crotch shots, they can really delve into the definition of feminine minus the polution of the male point of view.

 
This poster knows how to make the world safe..
Why these people get irritated when someone talk about morality.

You people exposing morethan allowed any religion. Is it freedom. I call it utterly careless attitude of a community whom goes for freedom which destroy our social life by rape, adultry, drunks, abortion and all of form of sins which is prohibited by god through his teachings.

Go to Bibile. Quran or any other little moral writings. then we all will be in safe
This would be, I believe, the first time I ve heard the term  non-dick :
What a bunch of lying dicks and non-dicks, you came to this site to see pussy!

so where is it???

??  And then there are all of you pretending to have “intellectual thoughts” on this search for a pussy view.

Actually, in my search for a pussy shot, I’ve had a lot of fun at your expense……thanks.
This poster is concerned about Britney Spears self esstem.   Reminds me of the guy who, when one of my daughters  reamed him a new one for being a misogynist jerk, said, You re ruining my SELF of STEAM.

 
You have to either have, self esstem issues or would have been pretty damn pissed to go out to a night club and show your privates especially with no knickers on.
Come on celebrity or not your a women respect yourself. i watched a documentary on tv in the United States about young girls going out binge drinking and doing stupid things in public that they later regretted doing this was a classic example.

I say if your out drinking look after yourself.
I actually like Brittany Spears and i think shes beautiful and no matter what the media says about i bet shes an awesome mother……….im glad she got rid of that no good loser KFed.

I might give him a few points for the last paragraph, if he d made some comment about the photographers taking up-skirt photos and why that was wrong.    Oh well.
hi, heart.

It’s that guy defending the sadists again. I don’t know if you actually read these things or what. Anyways, I found another post by you on the same subject while I was surfing.

(I swear to God I’m not stalking you.) Anyway, it was on the same subject, and in it you mentioned that some people might think sadism and misogyny don’t necessarily go hand in hand, but that’s what you think and you won’t hear arguments to the contrary.
That’s repugnant.

I’m not offended by your views on the subject, I think they’re naive; but your refusal to let your beliefs be challenged disgusts me. If you don’t think you can defend your beliefs, well, god, you’re surrounded by people who can. If you’re not emotionally able to accept my views, well then you shouldn’t have started the conversation.

It’s this ability to surround oneself with nothing but like-minded people that I really hate about the Internet.
Like I haven t had 4,678,902 debates about this on the internet.  The guy can evidently find me with no problem, so I figure he should go find some of those old debates.

  It s so funny create one venue, just ONE, on the internet, which isn t going to tolerate endless wranglings over what might be wrong with sadomasochism and people are infuriated.  They can create 15 blogs a piece, you know, and write of the joys of beating someone, being beaten by someone, the thrills of risky sex practices like  fluid bonding, if they want to.  But create one venue where it isn t going to fly and they are disgusted and it s what they hate about the internet that radical feminist women have, at last, an opportunity to discuss what we want to discuss unhindered, undiverted, unattacked, without having to waste energy dealing with this kind of thing.

  I mean, if we want to talk to them, we can find them anywhere and talk to them, no?  Do they ever think about that.
Is it that hard to believe that some men might have misogynist bedroom fantasies, while not being misogynists in real life?

Yes?  Misogynist in the bedroom equals misogynist everywhere else.  This is the kind of man, and logic,  I find alarming and dangerous.

You also mentioned something (maybe on this board, maybe on that other board) that if you thought these guys had shown any respect for women, you might believe that they might be decent guys, but clearly they didn’t, and so on. Now, I don’t know much about online sex personals etiquette, but somehow I can’t imagine that if a woman went looking for some BDSM, she’d be all that interested in responses like, “Let’s respectfully discuss your proposal over coffee.”
Here is a guy who has just asked me whether I think it s possible for a guy to be misogynist in the bedroom and not misogynist elsewhere.

  Here he demonstrates why he doesn t even believe that himself.  From his perspective, if a woman is looking for an sm encounter, she must want to hear what all those guys in the Craig s List experiment had to say, no coffee and respectful discussion for her.
This philosophical dude feels we really need something more substantial than stories of women being dragged a mile behind a car, having their bodies chopped up and stewed on the stove, being raped and burned to death, being lined up in schoolrooms and shot, being basically unrepresented as heads of Fortune 500 corporations, to convince anyone that men terrorize women:
Generic man-hating isn’t going to gain momentum.

Yes, men can be dogs but you have to give the public something to work with here.
Yes, the whole human experience and history is strongly influenced by and dominated by males. Religion, law, government, as well as social and economic dissonance has developed.

Some barriers have been overcome, and most of your first world countries have decreased that dissonance. Less developed countries, generally speaking, seem to be more likely to have cultures that support females as being chattel. I think that the targeting that women get in first world countries has sublimated into forms that even they may not recognize as happening.

Personally, I think most undergarments women wear are designed exclusively by men for me. Pantyhose, bras, girdles, garters, et al all seem to fly under the radar of awareness, but in my mind are just short of something that could have been used in their own version of the Spanish Inquisition. Even womens shoes are designed to force them to strut provacatively, meanwhile their feet are being crushed and bent in painful directions.

Meanwhile, mens shoes and underwear are comfortable and functional. I have no idea why women put up with that stuff. Make-up, to me, is all part of that nonsense too.

If women want to be taken seriously, they need to take themselves seriously. Confidence, Intelligence, Independence, Assertiveness, and the ability to make decisions under pressure will get you farther than a tight sweater and boatloads of make-up. To be honest, it is more appealing too.

At last, the stunning conclusion:
Finally, I don’t think every pocket of the world is saturated with male dominance….if there are issues to be addressed in your corner of the world, the focus should be finding balance among elements to achieve equality. Vilifying all that is masculine may erode power of male dominated societal view, but the view will only last as the dominance the other way is held.

Education is key to a longer lasting balance.
Education is key to a longer lasting balance.
Heavy.

Glad you squared that away for us.
Sometimes women offer interesting commentary, per yay:
This site is retarded. Heart you are annoying.

Aside from the fact that I could care less about Britney’s crotch you seem to care too much what everyone’s opinion is on the subject. Like a little too much, I might add. Shut up already moron!

Here is my opinion on the matter. Britney should know better than to not wear panties and bend over in front of paparrazi or spread her legs with a short skirt on without panties knowing she is a huge star and will most definately be showing the world. She is skanky as in no class just like Janet Jackson who likes to show her boob to children at a football game then act all innocent.

Britney knew what she was doing and if she is that stupid to do everything I just mentioned without any inkling of the ramifications then maybe she will learn from her mistakes and embarrassment if she even feels any. Obviously, it was a publicity stunt and she enjoys that kind of attention and will do anything to get it. Just so you know, i wore a really short skirt on my birthday with no panties but I was with my bf and I am not super famous so no gives a rats ass.

If I were, I would be seeking attention by showing my crotch on purpose to the media. BTW, Britney you need to get some rash medication. Good going.

Lastly, everyone should just move on now because no one really cares about what Britney does as they really shouldn’t. Worry about your own crotches, fire crotches and what not. Hell if i was papparazi and i saw that I would be clicking away with the camera as well so….

yeah. Get real! No one got hurt in the making of this retarded publicity stunt.

Way to go Britney and rock on with your bad self. Everyone has an opinion and it really doesn’t matter what anyone thinks- not even Heart or me. So move on with your life Heart.

We get it already.
Even though that commentary is Exhibit A of internalized misogyny, I can t help but laugh every time I read it.  Sometimes, all you can do is laugh.

Sorry if I was rude in my last post but I just get a little upset when people obsess over justifying other people’s mistakes (if you want to call it that)as if it really matters. What she did was her own doing and every single person has a different opinion on the matter and yet it still doesn’t matter what any of us think. We don’t know Britney or what she thinks on a daily basis.

The only support she needs is her real life friend’s and family. You all go on and on as if you are making a difference when all you are really doing is wasting your time and energy about annoying papparazi that are like roaches and will never go away. I am sure she has adjusted to the lifestyle she chose as most people do.

And i really didn’t see any rash in the pictures. I was just being sarcastic. I wish Britney well and don’t care about her crotch and I hope she isn’t affected by this too much.

Who knows? Maybe she was drunk.
And even finishes with season s greetings!

There are much better things to worry about and discuss and think about like Christmas in a few days and being with loved ones. Take care and be well. Merry Christmas all
Tei Tetua, who if I m not mistaken is a men s rights guy who posts at Alas sometimes, wrote the following in response to .

   In a bedazzling example of precisely that phenomenon, Tei Tetua thinks it s important to focus in on which Boston paper published the article (I named the wrong paper) and the bad company feminists are keeping publishing the article there.  Forget about atrocities against women, whatever, atrocities against women happen.  Get used to it.

  Also, forget about the fact that mainstream newspapers don t publish articles about atrocities against women as atrocities, which was the whole point of the article I linked to.
That article was from the Boston Phoenix, not the Globe. The Phoenix is a weekly paper that used to be “underground” or “alternative” or whatever you want to call it.

It’s the kind of paper where each issue includes a sex section with all the ads from “escorts”, and every time, that section has an appropriately enticing picture on the cover. The same issue of the Phoenix also had an editorial slamming Jimmy Carter for his recent book comparing Israel today with South Africa in its bad old days, which I think is a topic that needs to be talked about much more (and there’s a link with “Orthodox Jewish woman beaten by men”). In other words, some people might say that feminism isn’t in the best company in that paper.

Then this guy crawls out from under his rock to remind us all that we are, truly, surrounded by pedophiles, misogynists, dangerous men.  Men who say what this man says below are dangerous men.
When men expose themselves in public they are considered as flashers and could face charges of indecency, but when Brittany Spears does it to save her dying career she’s the poor victim of men’s peversity.

She has become a public figure ever since she wore her enticing and provacative school girl uniform. She put herself in the sexual market place, music videos. It was Brittany’s choice to tie her shirt up to expose her belly,not the audience.

It was Brittany that decided to put a new twist to the old school girl fantasy that has been around for as long as there has been school girls. Her twist was to put an actual girl who was still in school in a music video. Where as in the past this school girl fantasy was usually filled by someone older posing as a school girl.

Most men who buy into this fanasy usually have to pay someone to do this, Brittany just made it more acceptable. Brittany is desperate for adulation. She using something other than her voice to attract an audience.

Why would any women put themselves in that situation. Obviously she isn’t modest because she really plays up her sexuality on stage. Take for instance when Brittany and Madonna kissed on national television.

Two music celebrities selling a form of sexuality on public television. But it’s perverse for men to watch it or want to see more. It’s perverse that men want to see her crotch now, get real.

Brittany is the only one selling crotch shots. Why should men be persecuted for buying something a grown women wants to sell. For Brittany she has decided to sell her voice and image and it seem she has developed a market for herself.

Now the general public wants what she is selling. And I bet there are many lesbians out there you aren’t hating because they want to see Brittany’s crotch. Society has come a long way accepting gays and lesbians for who they are, why can’t you get off your high horses and let men and women do what they have always done.

Men have to do all the chasing after the women they love or lust after and it is the women who does all the rejecting. History isn’t written about women pursuing their mate it has always been the man.Traditionally it has been the man who asks for the first date.

I know alot of women,but I don’t know very many women who ask men out on dates. And I don’t know many women who go around in little black miniskirts witout panties. Especially if they are going to a public function where they’ll be the centre of attention.

what Brittany does with her crotch is her business and everyone is buying it. I think she would do better just doing a sex video like her moral compass, Paris Hilton. Women’s groups aren’t exactly lining up around the blockto protest the expoitation of poor Paris Hilton.

No women’s group has picked up the cause for poor Pamela Anderson or Janet Jackson. And what can we do for the exploitation of Madonna.Face it sex sells and it is usually done by a man and a woman.

Now days it done by evryone to anyone. Who knows now days. Stay tuned for the next big production of chasing beaver, apparently it’s a bisexual thing.

With so many problems in the world why do we need to spend time on this. She is just wanting publicity.
Yeah, man.

  Let the poor dudes get their crotch shots, would you?
“I can’t believe there are still women who don’t get it: ALL men. ALL men.

All. It’s concealed to get laid. It’s revealed when they lose it.

Take a look at the nice men in the Craig’s List post: see the lefty cool guy with the bandana, the guys out there in ‘nature’, the grandfatherly looking guy? There will be women who they have helped across the street, stood up for in a harassing situation, loaned money to so they could buy school books for their children, spoken for when she didn’t get a promotion, agreed that women should be able to walk here and there safely. Get real.

They’re all rapists. It’s not this guy is good, that guy is bad. Men.

They are all men, and they all have the privilege. The man you are sleeping with/working with/sitting next to in your gender studies class/being a blood donor/working for community issues/saving your babies life in the pediatric ward~~~~~~~~ALL.”
is this any different from saying all blacks steal?

all blondes are stupid? all feminists hate men?
This kind of question is, again, why I moderate.

   To respond to this level of cluelessness would require energy, time, and bandwidth none of us has to spare, and all of us prefer to devote to women s issues.  Besides that, anybody who finishes that kind of question with, just curious is asking to be spammed.
Way to go with lumping all men together in one awful sea of women hating testosterone.

Can’t you see that these are just sad wankers trying to get laid? I guarantee you that 99% of them have never taken part in any BDSM activity before and simply saw the ad as an opportunity to get laid. The ad was specific in saying the submissive wanted cruelty and violence so that’s what they offered.

The ad was graphic, so they were graphic in their replies. It’s not about hating women; it’s about meeting a biological imperative to have sex with as many women as possible. These guys are not angry they’ve been ‘outed’ as women haters; they’re angry because they’ve been outed as sad little men who can only succeed with women who put up no resistance.

This guy is creative and original!
You all need to get laid.
fuckin’ nice.

where can i get the video???

??love to have it.

oh by the way fuck you broads!
if heterosexual sex was a male dominated thing: wed have a hell of alot more people on earth. Men think of sex every 58 seconds, women do maybe twice a day.

Here the facts-and-figures guy evidences he doesn t know the difference between rape and sex,  has no clue that in fact, most rapists walk and none, in the U.S., is killed for rape,  and doesn t get it that women bear no responsibility for their own rapes:
Concieving a child is a two-way thing, if a woman is raped than she goes to the authorities and-while they kill the man who did it- she gets counseling.

I ll include his final line because of its unique and interesting spelling of chauvinistic, kind of along the line of Jovan for Men :
P.s.s.

The Media only has “concoted” a shovanistic view of women because there are women out there that will submit themselves to being photographed, exploited, ectectect as a career opportunity.
Not to be dissuaded by the radical feminist nature of this blog, the politics of this blog, or the posts in this blog, ardent life offers us biblical counsel:
People are imperfect. In fact, this is the very foundation of Christianity; people fail, ad God stepped in to save the day.

People screw up every-single-day. When a person is hi-lited as a good and godly person, one that you aught to respect, it somehow amplifies there Sin as somesort of huge imposing hurricane that wipes out the importance of what that person taught. People screw-up, get over it already.

Let
God be named True, and every man a liar.
I like the part I bolded.  Yay, verily and amen to that.

 
There was an article in the Seattle P-I last night about a young girl named Ashley who is undergoing a treatment dubbed the Ashley Treatment.   According to her family s  , she has a condition called static encephalopathy of unknown etiology , which means an insult to the brain of unknown origin or cause, and one that will not improve.   She is now nine years old, and would have been expected to attain adult height and size.

  She  cannot keep her head up, roll or change her sleeping position, hold a toy, or sit up by herself, let alone walk or talk. She is tube fed and depends on her caregivers in every way.    She will never develop mentally or cognitively beyond three months of age, but is expected to have a normal life span.

The “Ashley Treatment”  includes growth attenuation through high-dose estrogen therapy, hysterectomy to eliminate the menstrual cycle and associated discomfort to Ashley, and breast bud removal to avoid the development of large breasts and the associated discomfort to Ashley.
A fundamental and universal misconception about the treatment is that it is intended to convenience the caregiver; rather, the central purpose is to improve Ashley’s quality of life. Ashley’s biggest challenges are discomfort and boredom; all other considerations in this discussion take a back seat to these central challenges.

The “Ashley Treatment” goes right to the heart of these challenges and we strongly believe that it will mitigate them in a significant way and provide Ashley with lifelong benefits.
The family goes on to say that these treatments will allow Ashley to remain a size which enables them to hold her, take her with them many places, carry her, and bathe her easily (4 5 , 75 pounds).  They believe it will reduce the chance that she will be sexually assaulted by caregivers and will eliminate the pain and difficulties of menstruation.

   She began to develop signs of puberty at six years of age, which is when the family worked with doctors to begin the treatment.  The family intends to care for her at home always, and says she would have been cared for at home always regardless her size, but that being small will give her options she wouldn t have had had she grown to full adult size.  It sounds to me as though this is a Christian family; if I were a betting woman, based on the way they say what they say about God, and based on their reliance on doctors and traditional medicine, I d say they were Roman Catholic.

  They seem to be devout Christians.
For my part, I think this is horrifying.  It is particularly odious to me that the parents felt the need to remove Ashley s breasts (because she didn t need them) and her uterus (ditto), and that fear of their daughter being molested by caregivers figured heavily into their decision.

  
What have we come to that we will remove a young woman s breasts and reproductive organs to increase the likelihood she will not be abused by caregivers ?  What have we come to that we think removing breasts and reproductive organs will keep any child or any woman safer from sexual assault?  How is it that the belief is, it s the breasts and the body which invite the abuse, as opposed to the misogyny and depravity of anyone who would sexually abuse anyone, but particularly a vulnerable, disabled girl or woman?

  How is it forgotten that babies are sexually abused, toddlers are, small children are, little boys, little girls, all the way through old women, all the way through animals, all the way through corpses, are sexually abused, and in these assaults, the presence of breasts, or not, or uteruses, or not, or human bodies or not, or living bodies, or not,  matters not one whit.  Why aren t we insisting that caregivers not be sexually predatory? Why aren t we insisting that no one should ever be sexually abused again, and donating ALL of our available resources to that end?

How is it that if a girl isn t going to breastfeed she doesn t need her breasts?  Who says?  How is it that if a woman isn t going to bear children, she doesn t need her uterus?

  Who says?  Since when are breasts only about breastfeeding and uteruses only about babies, to the point that we will cut a girl or woman up in repeated major surgeries  if she s not going to be doing either?  Without asking her?

 If any of us were asked whether we d be up for having our breasts cut off and our uteruses cut out because we won t be using them anyway, what would we say?
What if we could ask Ashley what she would say?  And understand her response?

  Would a nine-year-old agree to these irreversible, life-changing procedures?  On what basis do her parents, or her doctors, make that decision for her,  if not?
Here s what stands out to me, though:
The objection that this treatment interferes with nature is one of the most ridiculous objections of all; medicine is all about interfering with nature.

Herein lies our problem.  Here the family makes a point that, because of our failures to think and act in ways which are feminist and woman-centered, in ways which value women s lives and bodies,  we have no good answer for.  As the family points out, we have come to a point in history where not only is it considered foolish to even consider nature, doctors, psychologists, scientists, drug companies, geneticists, regularly, recklessly disregard nature in favor of surgeries, hormone treatments, invasive procedures, experiments, treatments of all kinds, without a clue as to how those who are beng treated  might  actually fare in the future, without any consideration as to what this might mean for girls and women.

  They do what they do because they can.  There is no one to stop them.  Especially not feminists.

What is going to be the objection we raise now, as feminists, to this treatment, given that as a movement, we have not been objecting to the anti-woman abuses of patriarchal medicine, science, and psychology all along?  Now that, as feminists, we ve consistently ignored the abuses of procedures like hysterectomies (done needlessly most or much of the time), c-sections (ditto), mastectomies (ditto), now that feminists have offered defenses of in vitro fertilization, surrogate motherhood, hormone treatments, invasive, dangerous reproductive technologies of all kinds, now that feminists have defended the donating of eggs, now that feminists have defended sexual reassignment surgeries and hormone treatments and cosmetic surgeries and gastric bypasses   not all of us, it s true, I sure haven t, this has been my soapbox for years, but most feminists have  well what s our basis going to be for objecting to this procedure?  Or any similar procedure?

  
Based on what I ve read on feminist and progressive blogs so far, most feminists don t have any feminist or woman-centered basis for objecting to this procedure, not really.  Some arguments about slippery slopes.  Some arguments against objectification of the disabled.

  Not much more, that I saw. 
We needed, as a movement, to be objecting to the invasive, misogynist procedures of patriarchal medicine, in unison, loudly, years and years ago, decades ago. Some of us were, have been and did, and have been roundly trounced for it, including by feminists and progressives.

This is the result.  One of many, I am very sure, similar results to come.
The view looking out from my tent on Womyn s Land one morning, Michfest 2004
As a radical lesbian feminist separatist, I claim as my heritage lesbian/feminist politics and culture.

And I want to be very clear that what is contested here is the existence of that culture, and who will define the terms of its existence. This is demonstrated, perhaps most clearly, by the relentless protest targeting the , and the fact that a major source of the momentum behind that protest comes, not from transwomen, but from (to use the festival s terminology) women-born-women. To some extent, the transgender movement is being used by certain lesbians in an attempt to gain control over the definition and future direction of lesbian/feminist culture, to continue the trend of focusing away from women- and lesbian-identified lesbians and our interests.

This disregard for and denial of lesbian/feminist culture is demonstrated by the demands of Camp Trans, and others, that artists who perform at Michigan should be banned from queer events throughout the rest of the year artists who, in many cases, have dedicated their lives to feminist activism and the creation of lesbian/feminist music, writing, and art. Their lesbian performances, and their lesbian/feminist perspectives, are not welcome at queer festivals unless they toe the transgender party line. This is demonstrated by the response to back in the spring, and by the fact that the entire current internet brouhaha was begun by someone criticizing the posting of a quote by Sheila Jeffreys having nothing to do with transgenderism.

Whenever a lesbian is accused of transphobia, any work that she may have done on behalf of women or lesbians is crushed underfoot and trampled into the dirt. It does not matter; it s as if it doesn t even exist. The fact that Michfest has for 30 years provided a refuge for lesbians to express our sexuality openly in a world where sexual love between women is still punishable by death not to mention a space in which women and girls are safe from male violence means nothing in the terms that have been used to frame this debate.

The fact that Alix Dobkin has spent her life traveling the world performing for women/lesbians only, singing and writing about the lives of lesbians, means nothing. The fact that Sheila Jeffreys is a brilliant feminist historian who has traced the repression of female sexuality by men is absent from this controversy. These facts and many more like them illustrate nothing less than an attempt to erase an entire culture which is ironic in the face of transgender activists endless assertions that women and lesbians try to define the experience of transwomen.

Given the continual denial of the value of lesbian/feminist efforts for lesbians and women, it sure looks like the transgender movement is trying to define, if not outright destroy, lesbian/feminist culture as an autonomous free space created by lesbians, for lesbians. This amounts to sexism within the LGBTQ community and in this sense, this conflict is part of the greater backlash against feminism. This is one reason why this controversy is, or should be, of concern to mainstream, straight, and liberal feminists.

I am the inheritor of lesbian/feminist culture. I am one of those the women who started Michfest in 1975 were dreaming of a generation of lesbian/feminists who might come along behind and build on what they started. So many of those women did not have children of the body, but I am nevertheless their sister-daughter; perhaps I am also their sister-lover, for I surely love them and what they built, passionately, with my whole self, heart/mind/body/soul.

And I am here to tell you that, as the creative bloom of an oppressed group, that culture is valid, on its own terms. It has the right to exist as it sees fit. It has the right to define itself in any way it chooses.

It has the right to a political analysis that makes sense from where it, we, I stand. I am here to tell you if you are not living in the world as a lesbian, as a woman who loves women, who puts lesbians first, lesbian/feminist culture is not yours. If you are attempting to appropriate lesbian/feminist culture for the purposes of destroying all it has tried to build, your claim to it is not legitimate.

I have spent countless hours of my time and a pretty nice chunk of change working on to preserve some of the political writing of that culture not because I approve of everything that s in it, but because I think the history of my people and their struggles is important, and deserves to be known and understood by all people who claim to want justice.
Hear hear!  The crowd is on its feet, standing, waving, and cheering,  Amy.

  Rock on!
I have been deeply occupied over this past week with the  living out and carrying forward of the traditions and rituals of my womenfolk going back many centuries and millennia.   Matrilineally, I am of Norwegian and Finnish descent.

  I am only a third-generation American; my grandmothers on my mother s side came to America at their husbands bidding and insistence, a sad, sad day, for them, for my mother, for me and for my sons and daughters, and grandchildren as well.
I lived for half a century without knowing the truth of my ancestry:  that my foremothers, before the Christianization of Northern Europe, lived out their days in a culture and context in which the wisdom, strength and power of women were deeply and respectfully honored.   They understood themselves to be the daughters of, and surrounded invisibly  by, powerful giantesses, woman warriors, tribal mothers and wise women:   the Norns, also known as valkyrie or disir, who presided over their destiny and tenderly directed them, who were teachers, protectors and warriors, to whom whole communities turned for wisdom, prophetic insight, and protection from harm.

   In the world my foremothers knew, women were the keepers of wisdom, knowledge and magic; they were the givers, interpreters and protectors of the runes, which did not foretell or announce but which shaped the future.  My foremothers deeply understood themselves to have been made in the image of powerful, wise, highly educated, warrior women.  It is in this knowledge that during this time of year, near the winter solstice,  they carried out the traditions and rituals of Mother Night, known in Scandinavian countries as  Dísirblót,  festival of the disir or tribal soul mothers.

   They understood this season to be the time when the old year gives birth to the new, and as such, as a time to reverence all mothers, both living and dead,  real and mythological, biological and spiritual, who shaped their understanding of women s  and all people s and creatures place in this world.   
The traditions celebrated as Christmas traditions are really traditions of the Night of the Mothers, modrasnach :  evergreens brought into homes, gifts and offerings tied to its branches, presents beneath the trees, all in honor of the tribal mothers who had gone before, offered in the spirit of thanksgiving, reverence, and hope for the future.    Reindeer were evocative of the shape-shifting abilities of mythological woman healers; elves symbolized the Norns invisible protection and defense of the earth, its creatures and people.

  Even the star at the top  of the tree was meant to beckon the Mothers, to draw their attention.
It pains me so deeply the way these woman-centered, woman-loving rituals and traditions were and are relentlessly, deliberately, stolen, infantilized, trivialized, dismissed and especially co-opted by Christians, including Christians who have done their best to silence the Mothers voices, to wipe out all and every understanding and knowledge of women as powerful figures, goddesses in their own right, teachers, leaders, prophetesses, warriors, healers, defenders and protectors,  tender lovers.   The images all around us of women as slaves to their families at this time of year, frazzled servants, madly baking the cookies and wrapping gifts, haggardly decorating the fake tree in whatever this year s fad might be, make a mockery of the noble  and moving heritage which belongs to us, as women, of celebrating this very central night and season in which we honor our mothers, figurative, spiritual, fleshly, imagined, mythological, and their power to give birth or not, to give life, or not, to defend and protect life, or not, to teach, to lead, to shape the world.

  The traditions belong to us, to women, as a people.  They are ours to shape, to define, to protect and above all, enjoy.  They have been stolen from us, co-opted, but we can reclaim them.

It s in that spirit that I am enjoying what others call Christmas.   I made gifts for all of my children, grandkids, sisters and brothers this year:  small plaster hearts, embedded with bits of items precious to their womenfolk:  bits of my maternal grandmother s clay pheasants which sat on her coffee table from my earliest memories, buttons from my paternal grandmother s button box, dried flowers from my mother s garden, bits of wool from my flock of sheep.  I have offered these in my heart and mind to and in the memory of all of my women,  this great river of womyn, as a friend describes it, which has preceded me, which gave me life, whose traditions and rituals I have maintained, even during my own years of darkness when I didn t understand what it cost them to keep these rituals and traditions alive.

   I will be setting a place at my table this year for the Mothers, as well,  with flowers and a glass of this year s elderberry wine from the tree in my garden.  It will be the best seat at my table. 
It is said that once a woman realizes the truth of her spiritual heritage as a woman, her herstory, all of the great cloud of women witnesses rejoices and rushes invisibly to her side to strengthen and inspire her.

  I am feeling that today.  It is a grief, it is a torment, it is a thrill and an inspiration, as so much of this season of my life is.  I am listening to one of my favorite CD s this morning; the image above is the CD cover.

  It is entitled Wizard Women of the North, and every song rings for me, beginning with the song, Herding Calls, which is, yes, a song composed of women s sheepherding calls, (which sound amazingly like me when I call my sheep!), continuing with Word of Incantation, (indescribable!  you have to listen!

),  to the haunting, Illusion, powerful, Phoenix.  Well, just listen.  And buy.