Hugo Schwyzer agrees that the “possibility of equality” is indeed erotic.
In I Married a Lesbian, I briefly discussed some of the theories folks have proffered for my long-standing attraction to women who like women. Since the piece was published, a few readers have come forward with their own suggestions.
The sociologist Michael Kimmel (whose Guy’s Guide to Feminism I’ll be reviewing soon here at GMP) wrote me a kind note about the piece and offered an insight based on an experience watching women on the street in Oslo, Norway.
They weren’t objects of the male gaze, they were the subjects of their own gaze, fully entitled and empowered. I decided it was that – women’s sense of entitlement to their own subjectivity — that was so compelling.
”Lesbian” may be a shorthand for women who are not in public to be “seen” as objects of the male gaze. But who feel entitled to be there all by themselves. In other words, it’s the possibility of equality that is the turn-on, not the same-sex sexual attraction.
Below the article, commenter Jenny D says something similar:
I’m thinking there might be another reason why people are attracted to gay MOTOSes. There’s a certain relaxation in being in the company of someone who decidedly doesn’t view you as a sexual object. You can relax, let down some of the guards and refrain from some of the “preening” (for lack of a better word). That sense of comfort and safety is (to me, at least) very like the feeling of being with an SO you’ve been with long enough to feel secure in the relationship.
I think Michael and Jenny are on the money here. That “possibility of equality” is indeed erotic. Power differentials have never turned me on (one reason I’m troubled by age-disparate relationships). And what’s drawn me to athletes again and again is the combination of confidence in the body, the desire to perform publicly, and the longing to be validated more for what those bodies could do than for how those bodies appeared.
As for my whole short-haired brunette thing…
–
photo: dominicspics / flickr
About Hugo Schwyzer
Does that mean Feminism Is The New Equality – or is it – Equality Is The New Feminism?
Interesting. In my discussions with men, I have heard many times that men don’t trust other men. There is a sense of competition or judgement in male-male aquaintences. For this reason many men relate that they have more trusting and deeper conversations with female friends (platonic). But in those friendships there is always the potential for sexual energy to be a barrier to the friendship. There is also the potential for their partners to not trust the friendship to stay just that – a friendship.
With a lesbian the sexual tension and trust issue goes away and there isn’t the competition/trust issue in a man-man friendship.
I can fully understand the attraction.
Among my set of female friends and acquaintances I’ve observed the “preening” to be more frequent when they are going out together without any men in tow. When it’s a mixed group, the women appear to put much less effort into their appearance (not complaining, just observing). Every one of them is in a committed, long-term relationship which I would have thought would reduce the competition factor.
Both for myself and the men I’ve asked the single most attractive quality in a woman is confidence (not unlike the women I’ve asked – funny how that works). I’ve often considered athleticism to be a marker for confidence, but wit and unabashed intelligence are surer signs. As such, I find Rachel Maddow to be incredibly attractive, and not because she’s a short-haired brunette.
I dunno, I think it’s problematic to say that you’re attracted to “lesbians” for reasons other than the fact that they’re sexually attracted to women. Because honestly, their orientation is only thing that the group has in common.
The unfortunate part is that lesbians still very much are subjects of the male gaze, whether they want to be or not, and it doesn’t take lesbianism to empower a woman and make her feel entitled to her own sexuality. Personally, I meet your above criteria for attractiveness, and couldn’t be further from being a lesbian.
I think you need a new term for this category of woman that you like.
Unobtainable?
I was thinking something less involving the whole idea of sexual conquest, but whatevs.
Unobtainable – Desirable – Erotic – they have been strange bed fellows for quite a long time.
Maybe Equality is the Focus, from a deep desire to transcend differences and internal impulses?
But if that was the case it could equally be focused upon anyone who is not sexually accessible – for example a celibate heterosexual of either sex.
Yeah I just prefer calling a spade a spade. Don’t say you like lesbians for qualities that some of them have that aren’t exclusive to lesbians by any stretch of the imagination. If you like girls who like girls because of just that, then just *say* that.
My chart is all feminine signs, so– how not?