I am out of the closet, but still confused about which category I fall into. These are my characteristics: 1. I may be cool and aloof in the relationship. I hide and do not show emotions, I believe it is a weakness. 2. I am fairly intelligent. I am doing aviation and aeronautical engineering at university, performing above average. I also happen to be the youngest member of the class. 3. I am a feminist. The reason why I wanted to be an airline pilot is to enter a more male-dominated career and kick ass. Show what women can do when those asshole sexist straight men criticize us just for sex and giving birth. 4. I tend to get hit on by a lot of guys, and women, not so much. They think I may not be a lesbian. 5. I hate stone butch/dykes. I want a super-feminine, pretty girl that dolls herself up as a partner. I will not even befriend a stone-butch in fear that she may have feelings for me or develop it. My philosophy is basically that if I'm lesbian, I want a REAL woman, not a fake-pretending-to-be guy one. If it was between a guy and a butch, I'd, OF COURSE, pick the guy. 6. If I had a partner, I want to be the dominant one in the relationship. I don't want to be courted or bottomed. I want to top and look after her. ***In case you may be curious, this is what I look like, attached below
I find categories unhelpful - and trying to find the "right category" into which to put yourself is a futile endeavor which yields no benefits whatever. Labels are for groceries, not people. You are who you are and what you are. If there isn't a label for it, who cares?
I flew a Mooney. Until I failed the eye exam. I really wish you had said you fly because it is awe-inspiring, too. Don't look for categories. People are more important than preconceptions. When I date women, I look for witty, vibrant, sexy women. Sometimes they are more traditionally feminine, as am I, sometimes they are more traditionally masculine with very interesting exceptions to the rule. I have jokingly said that's the best of both worlds. (The flip side is a strong appreciation for men who are not traditionally masculine.) Just look for the soul who excites you to your core.
I see people try to categorize lesbians into like two main types; butch and femme, but I think there's an infinite number of kinds, I picture a general spectrum, one side's really really butch, the other's really really femme, and there are a million in-betweens. Just looks, I don't think the names always fit the personalities. But, on a philosophical level, there are so many different kinds of lesbians that don't fit the stereotypes, it's probably easier not to try and label them all. You are your own type of lesbian. I so agree with your opinion of asshole straight men, there need to be fewer women teachers and nurses and more scientists and engineers! Like, no major scientific discovery has ever been solely credited to a woman.
Not so fast... http://www.theguardian.com/society/...throughs-by-women#/?picture=372450138&index=7 The cases of co authorship have females as lead researchers.
Okay, okay, compared to history a lot more women are making progress in science. But I'm talking about, we haven't had a female equivalent of fame and importance as say, Einstein or Stephen Hawking. I'm hoping that one of us cracks global warming or the cure for cancer.
Aren't you forgetting Marie Curie? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Curie I admit that she is in a pretty lonely category of great women scientists ... but I think the only person ever to win nobel prizes in more than one scientific discipline has to deserve her place alongside Einstein and Hawking (neither of whom achieved that distinction), don't you?
