(Dec 19 2024, 3:17 PM)komorebi (Disclaimer, bisexual here, and my opinion's just my own. 😂)

I get how they arrived at the term "political lesbianism," but I don't like the words they chose. Especially because of gender crap, which is a separate but related issue, I think it's important for the definition of "lesbian" to be a woman who's exclusively attracted to other women. Any bending of that definition creates room to pressure lesbian women into sex with men.

I don't want to call it "biphobia" because that's so dramatic, but I do think that women who are attracted to men and also willing to partner with women should just call themselves bisexual, there's no need to go stealing the word "lesbian." Being bi, I have always made sense of things this way. If I partner with a woman, I'm still bisexual, and if I partner with a man, I'm still bisexual. 🤣 But to be fair, I think societal discourse at large has always been kinda like this (as in you're either straight or gay, no inbetween), so it makes sense that people get tripped up by it.

In terms of the actual practice, I have no objections to it whatsoever. The more women who cut men out of their lives, the better, probably. As long as they are straight-up with other wlw and don't call themselves "lesbians," I don't see the problem with it.

(Mar 23 2025, 2:05 PM)Fortherecord You being bisexual proves the point I have been making. There is a mental block by non-heterosexual women on this topic. Yes you being bisexual causes a lack of understanding.

(Mar 23 2025, 3:19 PM)komorebi

(Mar 23 2025, 2:05 PM)Fortherecord You being bisexual proves the point I have been making. There is a mental block by non-heterosexual women on this topic. Yes you being bisexual causes a lack of understanding.

I think my previous reply to @VerdantHorizon hopefully cleared up any misunderstandings we may have had on this topic! But I would just like to question the suggestion here that my being bisexual causes me to not understand the straight experience. Heterosexual people are the default in every society and every culture on the planet, and in nearly every single piece of media that people encounter growing up. If anything, could we not say that your being heterosexual leads you to lack understanding about *my* experience, and that that lack of understanding is probably more fundamental than mine?

But I don't think that's a productive line of conversation. I prefer to empathize with other women, even when their experiences are different from my own. I may not experience the world the same way as you in a visceral sense, but I'm perfectly capable of understanding that we have different preferences and different values on this subject, and I'm able to do it without devaluing your experience or suggesting that you have a fundamental inability to understand me, because I don't think that's true. :) I think it would be better to approach conversations on Cloven Hooves in that way going forward. I know that many people may be joining from Ovarit in the coming days, but this forum is not like Ovarit.

(Mar 23 2025, 3:06 PM)Clover

Fortherecord As a heterosexual woman it is not appealing at all. You would never tell a lesbian to have a platonic life partnership with a gay male. The fact it doesn't involve romance and sex doesn't make it less tone deaf and dismissive.

Why would anyone ask for that to be done? 4B is done in the context of [straight] women choosing to not seek out partnerships with the oppressor class, to make a political statement, for safety, etc. Lesbian women are oppressed on the axes of being female and being homosexual. What benefit would there be for someone to tell a lesbian woman to have a platonic life partnership with a gay male? There is no good reason for this, besides things like economic hardships in unjust systems, like Dworkin marrying a gay man to get healthcare coverage iirc. For female separatism and 4B-type movements, the reason is to make a stance against the oppressor class.

I think anyone "telling" straight women to go have platonic life partnerships with other women seems like the 2nd wave "political lesbianism" type of activism. Which I think differs from the modern 4B. Just because 4B means no sex/relationships with men, it doesn't mean straight women need to go make themselves fill the void of a romantic relationship with a male with a platonic female relationship. The point of 4B should be for women to center themselves in their own lives and stop providing the copious amounts of free labor, emotional/mental/sexual/physical, that they give to men.

Fortherecord Stop sitting up and theorizing on our living arrangements and who we will choose as life partners. The OP for this thread claims to be heterosexual, but 9/10 these topics are started by bisexual or lesbians-- and they simply don't have a right to participate or moderate these conversations.

I'm not sure what "these conversations" mean, but bisexual and lesbian women are welcome to participate in discussions regarding 4B and female separatism. Anyone can "theorize" on anyone's living arrangements. The idea that women who have no interest in romantic relationships with men should not be allowed to theorize on women's living arrangements or relationships with men is strange. If anything, SSA women are more likely to point out the implicit biases and behaviors that straight women put up with with men that those who aren't sexually attracted to men wouldn't bother to put up with. Women gain nothing from being told to not discuss their observations on how other women, women they might not share the same perspectives or lived realities with, interact in society.

Fortherecord With a man a sexless relationship could still be satisfying because we have underlying emotional feelings.

I'm confused. Sexuality is based on sexual attraction. Why can't heterosexual woman have "emotional feelings" with other women? I'm straight, and I love my close female friends and family members. I could never be sexually attracted to my female friends, because I'm straight. I could be sexually attracted to men, but have no emotional feelings for them. I could have emotional feelings for a man, but not be sexually attracted to them. If the "underlying emotional feelings" are what make sexless relationships with men satisfying for straight women, does that mean straight women don't have underlying emotional feelings for women..? I would disagree with that. Love isn't inherently sexual..? One doesn't need to feel love to have sex, one don't need sex to feel love.

Regardless, in the end, yes, a straight woman having a platonic partnership with another woman is going to be different from a sexless relationship with a man. Mainly there would not be any sexual attraction at all. Of course, there will be something missing. It's not meant to be appealing, it's meant to promote women's liberation from male oppression.

(Mar 23 2025, 9:00 PM)Fortherecord Talk about missing the point. LOL.

Quote:It is irrelevant why heterosexual women are being told to be celibate.

Quote:Replacing romantic life partnership with platonic female life partners misses the point and to many women is still offensive.

As a heterosexual woman it is not appealing at all. [...] I mean if someone wants that-- that is valid, but the way it is just thrown around is odd.

Quote:A lot of times, asexual women/bisexual women/lesbians will flippantly promote heterosexual women having "female platonic life partners".

Quote:Whereas talks about platonic female life partners for heterosexual women is lazily thrown around by bi women and lesbians.

Quote:Even if one supports women abstaining from men/4B, I don't see this impulse to advise or even suggest heterosexual women have platonic wives. 4B and political lesbianism is not the same thing, but these conversations of go find yourself a female life partner eventually comes up with 4B talks. I mean look at this thread.

Quote:It is always "this is what heterosexual women should/could do" and it is offensive. It is not their conversation to have.

Ji Yeon So divorced women, single moms — they were wondering if they are able to participate in 4B, if they’ve ever had a kid, for example. In Korea, there aren’t a lot of single moms, and there are a lot more people who have never been married and do not have kids. But in America, there’s a lot more diversity in family types. So I told them, you can do 4B however you like, anyone can participate, but in Korea, we do it this way. I want the western 4B to be an independent movement itself, and I wanted to respect the democracy within those movements, so I won’t speak that much about what 4B in the West should be, because it’s American culture.

Quote:As far as why can't bi/lesbian women theorize about separatism--- I never said that. I said lesbians/bi women don't get to theorize about what platonic partnerships heterosexual women enter to.

(Mar 23 2025, 1:51 PM)Fortherecord Either way, I am tired of heterosexual lives being theorized with. Let heterosexual women who choose to be single decide. Stop sitting up and theorizing on our living arrangements and who we will choose as life partners. The OP for this thread claims to be heterosexual, but 9/10 these topics are started by bisexual or lesbians-- and they simply don't have a right to participate or moderate these conversations. 

komorebi Which is not at all to suggest that just because I'm fine with it, that other women should be. I don't think anyone on this thread has or would suggest that straight women should just accept partners they're not attracted to, lol.

(Mar 23 2025, 7:35 PM)Fortherecord You yourself said you didn't see much difference in what we are saying, so no growing up in a straight world doesn't mean much. A bisexual woman doesn't known and will never know how it feels to find women unattractive. 

I never said I understand the bisexual woman experience. The point is heterosexual feminist are rarely talking about bisexual women about their sexuality. Whereas talks about platonic female life partners for heterosexual women is lazily thrown around by bi women and lesbians.