Do you think (your) sexuality changes how you relate to women-only spaces?

Yes, great point Complexity. There is a lesbian academic called Rosemary Auchmuty who writes really well about girls' fiction in the first half of the 20th century - in those days passionate but non-sexual friendships between girls and women were seen as the norm, partly because social/educational life was more segregated and partly because there was much less pressure on girls to 'grow up' (ie become sexual beings) very young.

Agree with Rhubarb too about what a shame it is that everything becomes about sex. I am pretty celibate by nature (though vapidly heterosexual, to use LRD's excellent phrase above) and I do find it opens up more close relationships with people of both sexes.

THERhubarb You make a good point about lust.

I can only speak from my own experience and I guess people feel it in different ways.

For me, I am usually attracted to men for two different reasons (at a very basic level).

One is that they are physically very attractive to me (and I don't really have a 'type' so to speak).

The other is that I'm attracted to their personality, and I connect with them.

The two are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Luckily for me, I found my DH to be both.

However, they do often fall into one category or the other, and simplistic though it is, the sexually attractive ones for me, would often be highly unsuitable partners- clash of personalities, ideals etc. And the idea of making a life with them seems unlikely, despite this I would sleep with them if I was available and they'd probably be great in bed. (I suspect it's the clash in personalities that may well be part of the attraction).

Sometimes, sadly, I've met men whose personalities have been very attractive, but I haven't been attracted to them at all physically, and I can't get past a platonic friendship with them.

And I guess that's where I don't understand the term 'political lesbianism'? Is the idea that you are in a relationship out of choice to align with your political ideals?

If it is, then I would struggle, because I find many women great to be around, but I'm not at all sexually attracted to them. And I find having a sex life a very basic (and pleasurable) human need. One that I wouldn't feel comfotable denying myself.

yy Kritiq

Why does it always centre around sexuality?

Why such a huge focus on sex? Is this not a patriarchial idea in itself? Can women not have lustful relationships with men and women without being labelled either way? Without committing to a sexual act with either?

Complexity my 14yo niece is currently pregnant. Failed by her parents, failed by social services and failed by society in general. Another working class upbringing. From an early age my sister was forcing her to grow up, to concentrate on her image and appearance, to make herself the centre of attention. It's very sad.

I'm so very glad that I don't have to grow up all over again.

On a slightly separate issue . . . I think there does seem to be more of a "pressure" (if that's the word) within radical feminism at the moment for feminists to at least move towards "ideal forms" of intimate relationships that fit within the current conceptualisation of oppression and privilege.

Thinking back 20 years ago plus, I knew many feminists who chose relationships only with women as a reflection of their political ideals. They were open in explaining their reasons, but I don't think there was the level of "evangelising" (if that's the word) about political lesbianism that seems to be around now. I think that may be a function of at least some strands of radical feminism becoming more prescriptive about the beliefs and behaviours one must/should adopt to be a radical feminist.

It would seem that the ideal form of sexual relationship in this particular incarnation of radical feminism would be a committed relationship with another woman. It allows both people to enjoy both the physical and emotional pleasure of a relationship without in any way conforming to patriarchal ideals or colluding with patriarchal oppression on a personal level.

There are many people who do choose who they do and don't have sexual relationships with for political reasons. For example, Jewish people may choose only to date/marry other Jewish people. Some Christians do not have sex before marriage and aim to remain with the same sexual partner for life. Others may choose to engage in relationships with people of only the same caste, class or who hold the same political views. In that context, political lesbianism isn't that strange.

It would seem though that for those feminists who for whatever reason don't feel able to have a sexual relationship with a woman, the next best option is celibacy. You have to forgo the sexual pleasure bit, but at least are not colluding with patriarchal oppression in your personal life.

I think there may be some level of acceptance of women being in sexual relationships with men one, for procreative purposes, but also with the "hope" that their views will evolve, that they will leave these relationships either for celibacy or a relationship with a woman.

Lesbians who have not chosen their sexuality for political reasons likewise may become "convinced" that their relationships are a political act and not just the result of emotional attraction or personal preference.

I've seen some radical feminist writing that is very, very critical of bisexual women. I think there were a few comments along this line on another thread here as well. That might seem puzzling at first glance. But, I think the reason for condemnation and exclusion of bisexual women is that they have clearly demonstrated that they can be in sexual relationships with women, but they also value the option of relationships with men. It's as though they have no valid excuse for not rejecting sexual relationships with men, which means they are more "active" in their collusion with patriarchal oppression by having sex with men.

I'm not passing comment on the rightness or wrongness of this view, but rather just tapping out what I think seems to be the emerging view at the moment and checking out with others if I am on the right lines. Thanks!

Eats, I didn't say they can't.

I think they probably can. I'm just looking at lust in a different way by taking sex out of the equation.

Hully, we moved down south and yet I still see it. Ok dd is still only 12 but most of her mates have 'gone out' with boys, they talk about boyfriends and being in love, most of the girls have dyed their hair, they wear padded bras, a little make-up and enthuse about fashion and the way to wear their clothes.

dd still dresses like a 10yo, can just about be bothered to get a comb through her hair and hasn't the faintest interest in boys. She's labelled a lesbian, not that this bothers her (at least I hope not) but she's not included in any group because she's not 'cool'. She doesn't watch soaps or reality TV programmes or scream whenever OneD are mentioned (yeah, it's OneD now for short) and therefore her punishment is exclusion.

That's exactly what happened to me at school in Oldham. Nothing has changed.

For most women...

That's true Eats, in fact it would be more likely with women if it was about humour and meetings of minds, I'dve thought.

Erm, all the women I know are extrememely keen on sex...

I think this women being more into romance and flowers and sweet words is another load of suppress female sexuality male bollocks

Rhubarb if you think women "can get their 'lust' kicks through humour, debate, a meeting of minds etc" why cant they get that with women instead of men.

I also agree that women are expected to be more hetero and produce children and make good wives. Just look at where the blame lies when the man strays - either on the wife or on the mistress.

Women's sexuality is seen as instrinsically linked with mens and even lesbians are not fully accepted as most lesbian porn is made with men in mind. Society cannot accept lesbians.

However I question as to whether the majority of women would find it easy to become a lesbian. I really don't think women are that focused on sex and can get their 'lust' kicks through humour, debate, a meeting of minds etc.

yes, inevitably they will, we can only go on and on and on and on to counterbalance it..

sometimes their friends say stuff and they get all panicked and say, Don't say that in front of her... hahahaha

My friends dd and her friends are all orange with thick mascara and boyfirends for eg. None of that with dd and her mates

I think geog areas and schools make a huge difference.

I have one of each too, complexity

When people say that stuff to them, they roll their eyes and grin at me. And dd and her friends don't go in for girls = x AT ALL.

Yes that is my experience of teenage girls too. But those girls are learning to conform to what is demanded from them and probably at some level partly resenting that. So of course they will feel unhappy at any girl who is not also conforming and will try to make her conform

I do believe we are 'trained' to some extent to be heterosexual but a large part of your sexuality comes from within.

I don't find it bizarre that people can make a choice within that. It all depends on how you define 'sex' or 'lust'.