opposites and clones

And another thing about our not-so-little queer girl community. Either the couples out there polarize into Bubba and Mrs. Bubba or they look creepily like siblings. What is the deal? I was reading in the Pride 05 magazine about this lesbian, Honey Labrador, doing a Queer Eye for the Straight Girl thing and I practically yelled: NO, goddammit, stay home! Dykes are in desperate need of some style consultation of their own–the straight girls have legions of advisors.

Okay, so the younger lesbians are a little more in touch with presentation. And don't get your lavender panties all in a bunch, I'm not talking about Lesbi-glam. That's not the focus, L Word be damned. I'm talking about looking at your bodies (particularly the large & lovely variety) and giving your slump-shouldered, old oversized t-shirted torso an honest review. I hate spending time on image fussiness and I'm the first to admit that I could use a do-over. But you can be casual and sexy and big and put together without hours of primping.

I sound like a damn fashion consultant. It's not just about the surface, of course. For years we've defied the stereotypes about being girly-girls and rightly so. But rather than look like sulking mid-western farm wives or passionless, pale androgyns, why not face the stereotypes with a defiant panache?

Dictionary.com defines androgyny as:

1. Biology. Having both female and male characteristics; hermaphroditic.
2. Being neither distinguishably masculine nor feminine, as in dress, appearance, or behavior.

Isn't that something? A definition with completely opposite options. All or nothing. Okay, so I'd just as soon throw out the latter and run full-tilt with the former. There's nothing sexier than a tough, beautiful woman with close-cropped hair in jeans, leather jacket and a hint of lingerie. Or some femme-looking thing who can change a tire and flip you off. Very unladylike. For me, it's all about being strong and true to your full-spectrum self. How hard is that?

It shouldn't be so hard. And there certainly are people out there doing it. And, yes, there certainly are more important goals than image. Voting, for one. Reading. Thinking. etc., However, how we present ourselves is an indication or of how we perceive ourselves. Don't make it your life, just make it your opening paragraph and move on to the good stuff.

Jesuschrist, I sound evangelical. And I haven't even started on my rant about transgendered/intersexed issues and our hypocrisy in hesitating to include them...
...and my concurrent irritation with the continued polarization of what is a male or female?
...and how those stereotypes are such a hindrance.
I don't understand why a person fighting against the popular notion of being, let's say, a "real" man and all it means to the female side/center of him can turn around and embrace the same limited image of what it means to be a woman.

I know. I don't understand. I love the societally defined "feminine" and "masculine" aspects of myself and I don't understand why anyone would reject any part of themselves.
It's a continuum, people. All about our hackneyed, arcing spectrum of color.
The logic of biology and history point towards a majority of gender blending and a minority of gender polarization (which is not a rejection of you out there on either ends of the bell curve, so just calm down). And gender blending is simply about a panoply of qualities that would be better off unattached to a vagina or penis or anything in between.

Okay, enough, I'm exhausted. Besides I've got to find a pair of silk panties that match my big, butch pick-up truck.