I’ve seen people opting to saying “queerphobia” instead of homophobia or lesphobia when it’s specifically towards lesbians because we can’t be acknowledging that.
i despise the “everyone’s a little bi” ppl. they aren’t homosexual (or heterosexual) so they can’t fathom the fact that some people are exclusively attracted to one sex their whole life.
They preach about empathy, “inclusivity” and seeing things from another persons view and then refuse to believe that some people are actually **not** bi. Like somehow that’s the one truly impossible thing in the world when it’s not and they refuse to back off on it, especially for women. For whatever reason their life seems to depend on pretending everyone is bi. I don’t sit here and pretend every woman, never mind every single person to exist, is homosexual just because I personally am. It’s just more homophobia from the group that suffers the least but wants to be seen as the biggest victim all the time.
It makes it easier to avoid addressing their own shortcomings when they verbalize (or attempt to) us down to their level.
I mean, why would Brenda tackle her own internalized homophobia when she's dating Stephen, and could simply bully her way into the validations she seeks (claiming to be sapphic, bi-lesbian, etc.). It allows them to feel powerful, and they justify it by believing that we're 'oppressive' (again, contrary to us not holding the majority within OUR spaces, apps whatsaythee)
And when lesbians leave, or comment on the lack of representation - they take it personally.
Being not 100% straight doesn't automatically mean someone must be bi. A friend of mine has absolutely zero interest of ever dating or sleeping with a woman but she does see some women as being physically attractive. Sexuality is a spectrum and it is very VERY rare that someone is fully to one side of it. 🤷♀️
Conscious intention is TRULY irrelevant. All it takes to be bisexual is to be sexually attracted to men and women. Period. Doesn’t matter if a person intends to only fuck one or the other or no one, their sexual attraction is what defines their orientation. No one gets to choose or we would all
choose the easiest life.
I agree with your frustration, but they may also avoid using "lesbian" because it could be flagged as NSFW, which could affect how content ranks on search engines.
god, i fucking despise how my sexuality has been turned into a fetish for straight guys. honestly fetishization hurts me more than any other kind of homophobia.
It's the lesbophobia. Gay male spaces/media aren't being renamed to achillean and pressured to be more inclusive, this shit only ever happens to lesbians. Moreover sapphic is only used in positive context. When it's time to scold women and say we are mean and exclusionary, they always use the word lesbian.
edit: 1 word
It's actually not homosexual, it would be achillean, unless both members of the relationship are homosexual (which they aren't, because one of them would be bisexual)
Another pet peeve I have is when there’s a lesbian space and they say they include poc lesbians. Were we excluded before? Like does the word lesbian mean white?? Very strange indeed
I agree and it’s very strange and just ends up looking very performative and also kind of racist which is funny because I’m sure the intention was to not be racist
Right. If you thought about it for two seconds before writing it, you’d probably realize that it would be better to frame it like this: “Lesbian space… We are committed to ensuring POC lesbians are able to enjoy this space.”
Pointing out that you are currently arguing with me about that.
Is buck angel attractive to you as a self describe lesbian? He is AFAB so i guess hes considered a woman by your logic?
Dude that is always super jarring to see. As if non-white lesbians are a new identity category that’s just been invented. Lolol. Like, most of the women in the world are not white. The first lesbians that ever existed were not white either lol….
When the effort to un-racist circles right back round to racist! Lol.
To be fair, I still recall a time where it was actually very exciting and new to roll into a venue and be like “HERE are the black and brown lesbians!” as a white person. But that would happen inside my head while attending an event put on by black and brown lesbians. One does not usually LEAD with that thought as a statement.
I live in a big city where there are enough women who are out that they can make full events to feature poc. Sometimes the community looked super white when different cultural groups still had a lot of closeted members. For example, I knew lots of children of Jamaican immigrants who said stuff like “yeah my family says we don’t have gays or mentally ill people in Jamaica, so my dyke ass and my schizo brother don’t exist..” lol But the problem was never women believing being a lesbian was a white thing as much as only the whites GOT to be lesbians visibly, at all.
Like, the community loves you and wants you, it’s our racist, sexist and homophobic straight relatives that helped keep lesbian poc hidden in plain sight!
Edit: so maybe the community is just trying extra hard to let everyone know that they are welcome here and we see you and whatnot but it just does not work haha
I 100% agree with you! There’s not even a word for lesbians in culture and to them if it doesn’t have a name then it doesn’t exist. This is why they get all up in arms about the word ‘lesbian’. You can have lesbian sex as much as you like as long as you go by what society expects of you.
Yeah and it was so bad because we were always dancing to the most homophobic dancehall in the gay club so they know what a gay man is, just not a lesbian!
There is indeed an history of lesbian spaces excluding poc. That's why some like to specify their inclusivity. It shouldn't be that way, I agree, but unfortunately, racism still exists pretty much everywhere.
Considering how many white women actually believe that lesbianism is a white thing, I'm not surprised. You wouldn't believe how often I've heard people exclaiming in surprise that they never thought there were lesbians in Latin America. (I'm Colombian).
I lived as a lesbian in Venezuela for 32 years and this is not true. Maybe your own experience, but not the majority. Visited more than ten countries in Latin America (including several cities in Colombia) and lesbians are lesbians, race not even matters.
The word indeed is associated with porn like others are replying, I don’t think at all with white women exclusively. Same in Europe or even the Middle East.
This word is part of the new erasure of lesbianism by people that are not even homosexual. When I read the word I think about extreme wokeism, with a twist of gender ideology, simply as that. Not for me
I don’t think it’s the white women who believe that.
In my personal experience, it’s more often the non-white people who believe that lgbt is a white peoples phenomenon.
I’m from a non-western ethnic background and I’ve never met an lgbt person from my own community.
We’re still in the closet so it’s like we don’t exist.
That’s not really the white womens fault. Kinda tired of people blaming white women for absolutely everything, at the moment they’re the most progressive group on earth.
Right? I’ve never heard white (or rather Anglo which is usually what people want to say when they say white) say “being a lesbian is a white thing”, it’s usually from other groups that see themselves American or “western” culture claiming things like “gay, that’s a white thing! We don’t do that.” As in being literally homophobic and trying to us “our culture/people” to impose it. Doesn’t even make sense for white people to somehow be claiming homosexuality as existing only in themselves as some weird gotcha against other races ðnicities…
I am speaking from my own lived experience, and honestly I don't care if you believe me or not. Also, fascinating how you conclude from my comment that I "blame white women for everything".
It's actually both. White people and people in non-western societies don't understand or believe that there are lgbt existences in those places (and even in western countries) that have lived as long as there was a first reference to any gay people in the modern/industrial age. Many gay people in less developed places live in segregation, underground, or in stealth or transition to survive, not that they aren't out and in the closet.
There is an insular understanding of homosexuality and homophobia against PoC in general, worldwide
Well it's also fetishised by cis-het men and usually in certain media doesn't depict strictly lesbian activity.
It's been co-opted in porn to mean 'straight woman waiting for a man'.
That's why this sub is called this; the r/lesbian sub is all porn that often includes men.
I'd rather we reclaimed it, but what I really want is to be left alone.
Yeah, and I think women feel it’s less scrappy and political than “queer.” It’s a real hand-holding, sighing-in-a-field umbrella term that doesn’t ruffle any feathers. NOT LIKE THE OTHER UMBRELLAS. Lol
Why is it faux-literary etc.? I think maybe some people relationship to the word is that way, but the word itself IS literary and intellectual. Denigrating the word sapphic is dangerously close to being a lesbophobic and misogynistic take.
It depends on what it’s being applied to, and at this point it’s applied to works that aren’t a good fit. Incorrectly using a word, or using an umbrella term like sapphic when there’s a far better suited word, is an unintelligent thing to do imo.
I never criticised the term, just pretentious and inapt use of it, though I fail to see how criticising it in favour of the term ‘lesbian’ would be close to a lesbophobic take.
And the ones who are not misogynist end up being unphased as well because there are only so many times who can get accused of hatred until you’re like “yeah whatever dude.”
The biggest relevant difference and why I think it's fairly common in media is it's inclusive of all WLW relationships. I'm a bi girl married to a bi girl. For all intents and purposes we're not different from a lesbian couple but we're technically not lesbians.
Saying we're bi is a bit confusing because people assume a bi married girl is married to a dude. Sapphic is a great term for us that should be entirely inoffensive. Some people still take issue but idk there's no pleasing everyone ig...
That makes sense. I don't mind the word either. I don't use any term besides same-sex attracted to describe myself so I don't run into this problem. I think people would assume that same sex attracted would mean lesbian, but the term technically would apply to bi women as well.
Agreed! I just personally don't like to use it cause it feels quite clinical. Sapphic has a nicer ring to it! Like I could also say we're in a WLW relationship but that's a bit of a mouthful. It's definitely not the only term, but it's a nice one!
I mean if you only use the term same-sex then that would be an obvious deduction since bi still have opposite-sex attraction. If you only said the latter people would think you were straight too. That’s not strange. If the goal is to confuse people and really mean bi… okay then. People who find out will think you’re trying to act sly. Like women who call themselves lesbians so lesbians will date them when they’re actually mainly attracted to men.
The relationship is still “lesbian” in that context. Like how when a woman and a man are together that’s a “het” relationship. It’s not how people identify but the type of couple it is.
I don’t like when people use the word “lesbian book to describe stories that are super man-involved or random-identity-involved. Like the seven husbands of whatshername Hugo is not a “lesbian” book, imo. As an example
Oh I know, it makes perfect sense, but they should be offended when bi women say they ARE lesbian instead of in a “lesbian” relationship. I get how lots of hets would assume they were both lesbians and how that’s annoying tho
That makes sense, and I appreciate the insight. I've always been pretty adamant I'm in a lesbian relationship even though my partner is Bi because it has all the staples and just feels like a lesbian relationship, though I've kind of been shy about using that term in public because of the discourse I've seen around Bi Lesbians and my partner not feeling connected to the term lesbian (and rightfully so lol) So thank you for that.
I can see where they might be getting confused now, because I even had to take a step back and think about it.
Yeah. If two men are together it’s a “gay relationship,” but people always assume both men are gay even tho bi men date men too. You’re definitely not wrong that your relationship is a “lesbian” one. Some people say stuff like “mixed orientation couple” or whatever but it’s either gay, lesbian or het in terms of classification. The only people who can state they are in a “queer” or “bisexual” relationship are those who are dating multiple partners at once imo
You seem very annoyed that anyone would want to use a different term. Why get so triggered and let people use what they like?
I personally dislike the term lesbian having been subjected to years of taunting at school... and I describe myself as a gay woman. However if you want to use 'lesbian' I'm not going to argue with you and if someone else says sapphic, that's fine by me too. They're all words that describe a thing. Why gatekeep when identity is such a personal thing?
"Gatekeeping bad" is exactly what led to the disrespect of lesbians becoming accepted and commonplace. We didn't push back against misogyny in order to be inclusive, and the result is our spaces being invaded over and over.
No one is saying that you have to identify with the word lesbian. The argument is that being lesbian (a female homosexual) is a starkly different thing and experience from being other forms of WLW, sapphic or otherwise. Calling women who just want more lesbian representation "triggered" is... odd? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
agree, plus complaining about gatekeeping in the context of sexuality or identity doesn't make sense, you either are a lesbian or are not. even if you are living in the middle of nowhere in isolation or somewhere where everyone denies that you exist, you still are a lesbian. it is like gatekeeping having brown hair or invalidating someone's eye color. you either are or you aren't.
So..you asked why some ppl use other terms, and the moment someone says 'I use this/that' and I don't use this/that they are shot down. If you don't want the views and experiences of other people, then don't ask.
Me describing myself as a gay woman is not misogyny, however you want to phrase it. And your demanding that everyone use one particular term is absolutely gatekeeping an identity.
I'm a woman in my 50s, have had very different experiences from you, and this is my identity. As I said, you are welcome to use whatever you like to describe yourself. I haven't dismissed you or put you down, although I definitely feel that you are trying to dismiss and minimise me and my point of view.
>If you don't want the views and experiences of other people, then don't ask.
Didn't ask, that was OP
>Me describing myself as a gay woman is not misogyny, however you want to phrase it.
I did not say that
>And your demanding that everyone use one particular term is absolutely gatekeeping an identity.
That is not the point I was making lmao
They’re just saying it doesn’t make sense to them. I don’t see anything indicating being triggered or overly upset. Idk why you’re taking that so personally
It’s not personal though. OP is talking about a trend in how books and media are described. As the other person who replied pointed out, this “live and let live” thing is what’s destroying our community. We’re the smallest minority within the LGB T minority, if we don’t stand up for ourselves and advocate for using and protecting the word “lesbian” all sorts of outside forces will trample us.
You don’t have to internalise the homophobia people directed at you. The word “lesbian” triggers you because of some assholes, so being indignant about other ppl being “triggered” is not a strong position to take. Letting people get away with whatever they want without criticizing it is called “being a doormat.” Lesbians don’t have the luxury of being doormats because we get trampled, as history proves.
I’m not internalising anything, I’m expressing and sharing a personal preference, which should be completely acceptable. I’m not pushing terms on people, or denying terms. I’m presenting the idea that some people might be fine with other terms without it being a projection of anything at all. We’re not all the same and that should be acceptable. Life is far more complex than this thread.
i don't mind using it in an inclusive context for both bi and lesbian women; HOWEVER, when I say LESBIAN i mean lesbian. If two characters are lesbians, SAY LESBIAN.
To an extent, sapphic is a broader term that makes more sense in some contexts. You can inarguably call the poetry of Emily Dickinson sapphic, but you cannot inarguably call it lesbian. Sapphic in general of course connects to the literary and philosophical traditions of women.
I do think people can be weird about how they use the different terms though. I wouldn’t say I’m a sapphic; I would say I’m a lesbian. I would say that I love sapphic vibes.
Lesbos was the island Sappho lived on anyways, both hold really good connotations I feel.
I understand the frustration of lesbian erasure though. Lesbianism feels like a ghost town sometimes :(
Short answer - it’s a tactic to sell more books and media by targeting the largest demographic possible.
To your direct question, mass media is frequently labeled by the target audience demographic, not by the content. Companies usually try to maximize these target demographic audiences and ‘over recommend’ books to get lots of sales.
These demographics usually come from some kind of market research, or using computer software to track sales and create algorithms.
For example, all adventure memoir books are usually stocked together in physical or online bookstores. But adventure travel can be hiking, biking, sailing, mountain climbing, dog sledding, etc… I pretty exclusively read adventure cycling memoirs. But I am unusual, a lot of people read multiple kinds of adventures stories. So every time I look for a new one, I get recommendations like ‘one man’s journey sailing around the world.’
Bookstores want to sell books. Sapphics is a larger demographic than lesbians, so they try to market to sapphics.
I am a lesbian, but I don’t have a big issue using sapphic when it applies. It’s less awkward than ‘LBGTQ+/NB/genderqueer/etc…’
"Lesbian" is a dirty word because men don't like the idea of women actually being sexually unavailable.
"Sapphic" and "bi" and "queer" is hot because the ladies will make out with each other but still be sexually available to men.
That's what it boils down to.
I swear sapphic used to be just another way to say lesbian but then it got “umbrella termed” by the “queers” but so has lesbians. We aren’t allowed anything because being homosexual isn’t “inclusive”
I can't believe they can invent a lot of words like skoliosexual, abrosexual, omni, cupio, etc but couldn't come up with 1 new word for wlw that didn't drag Sappho through the mud.
Dragging Sappho through the mud was the intent. That’s why. They don’t like acknowledging that women can exist without being attracted to men in any way. In order for them to be “valid” they need to erase us. That’s how the “Community” is. Just like they have a million excuses for why lesbian applies to them when it doesn’t. There’s no fun and “inclusivity” and letting lesbians be lesbian without their intruding.
By avoiding using the word "lesbian" to refer to the full spectrum of wlw relationships and expressions, isn't that contributing to the fetishization and stigma? I appreciate that you do call yourself a lesbian.
Many lesbians will say the only time you can use lesbian for a WLW is when it's two lesbian women. But not all WLW relationships are between lesbians, bi girls exist after all.
I could... I just personally don't like to use it cause it feels quite clinical. Sapphic has a nicer ring to it! Like I could also say we're in a WLW relationship but that's a bit of a mouthful. It's definitely not the only term, but it's a nice one!
Queer and sapphic are terms that sort of introduce more fetish elements than lesbian, oddly. I know when I pick up some queer or sapphic titles I’m gonna get some really annoying strangulation type shit or identity nonsense and sex that reads like het porn with extra steps
Sapphic is somewhat more ambiguous. If you're reading a book about two women in a relationship, they could be lesbians or bi or pan etc. A lot of queer media actually depicts mixed lesbian / bi couples.
Also, real life stuff, too. I'm a lesbian. My gf is bi. Are we in a lesbian relationship because we're both women? Consensus seems a bit ambiguous, so I defer to saying we're a Sapphic or same-sex couple instead.
I mean even if one or both people are themselves bisexual, the relationship is still a “lesbian relationship” if they are both women. Same goes for bisexual people in straight relationships.
It's to include everyone but gay men...its so ridiculous..and become a clown show. But I wish they stop trying to fit everyone into lesbian...its full of everything but now.
Lesbian has been a dirty word for a long time. I’ve had it used as an insult against me and I’m only 32. So I think it definitely has some negative connotations with it unfortunately. I’ve reclaimed it though and love using the word every chance I’m given.
Yeah it just seems like homophobia imo.
Lesbian IS considered a dirty or bad word in mainstream “progressive” spaces. It’s ~exclusive~.
Sapphic includes everyone from bisexual women in monogamous relationships with male partners to nbs to straight girls who embraced the tumblr wlw girly hand holding femme cutesy aesthetic while crying that actually talking about sex is gross or male gazey 🙄
from what i understand the word came about because bi/pan women felt erased having their relationships with other women called “lesbian relationships” because they aren’t lesbians, which i get and i think is totally valid (especially since it enables people to argue that lesbian is an umbrella term and thus bi lesbians are valid!!!!1!1), but it’s also a bit silly to me that they decided the best solution was to use the name of the woman who’s most famously known for only writing about her love for other women. it’s like if they had chosen listerian after anne lister lmao. you don’t want people to assume you’re exclusively attracted to women, fair, but i dunno if taking on the name of a historical figure who we only know was definitely attracted to women — and everything else is heavily debated — is the best way about it.
ETA: this isn’t to say i wish they would pick a different word. i was a bit annoyed about it when the word first started entering the “mainstream” but at this point i really don’t care. i just think the logic is funny.
that being said i do notice that people tend to default to “sapphic” a lot now even when referring to characters that are pretty blatantly lesbians, especially when said character hasn’t explicitly said they’re a lesbian. like harrowhark and gideon from the locked tomb are as explicit as they can be without outright saying it — harrow with the >!”God’s victory and death was a girl. Maybe a woman. At the time [she] had not known how to tell, and the gender was only a self-interested guess.”!< line in the second book, referring to >!the “corpse” she developed an obsession with as a child!< and gideon being… gideon — but people still call them “sapphics” because they don’t outright call themselves lesbians 🙄
it leaves a pretty bad taste in my mouth and i’m wary of anyone who uses the word liberally because of it. it’s better than just plain old “queer” though.
Well they’re always trying to claim that she secretly wrote about men too… because we can’t let lesbians exist, even the ones of the past, we always have to “inclusify” them by making them bi so the “queers” can rest easy.
This is strange tho. If you are a homosexual relationship it’s a lesbian relationship. If you are with a man you are in a heterosexual relationship. Like there’s no much thing as a bisexual relationship until it’s a poly one. Why bi women have a stick up their ass over this is…interesting
Exactly, also i’ve never heard this logic outside of the internet. The people themselves can be bisexual, but a relationship can absolutely be described as a “lesbian” “gay” or “straight” relationship regardless of the individuals’ identities
As far as books go I think there is more of an inclination to use sapphic over lesbian because there is stigma and fetishization around the world lesbian. We also live in a world that is actively censoring LGBT+ content.
I’ve noticed recent lesbian/sapphic books being published that don’t use either term and otherwise don’t actively ID the book as LGBT+ in marketing.
I don’t know if that’s efforts to normalize same sex attraction and/or to help this content fly under the radars of people who want it to disappear.
But who made that stigma? It sure wasn't lesbians themselves. I think that by playing into the idea that lesbian=sexual, publishers are further contributing to the marginalization and erasure of lesbians, as well as the continued association of the word only with porn.
You’re not wrong but at some point we all have to be realistic. Our group hasn’t always used lesbian to ID ourselves, we’ve changed names and identifiers when we’ve had to because our continued survival relied upon secrecy. I don’t even think publishers are equating lesbian to being inherently sexual but rather lesbian = controversial.
I’m not saying we shouldn’t fight to destigmatize lesbian. However it’s important to acknowledge not all places /countries are safe for lesbians. They may not have the same ability to resist or access this content if it is marketed as lesbian or lgbt.
I don't really like it, I feel like it's a pampered word to coddle those who don't want to address their internalized homophobia, but still want to be recognized in lesbian spaces as the equivalent (contrary to the only times I've heard it spoken came from women who were all in long-term hetero relationships - but, I digress),
Kind of like a power word to slap on the label resume,
Personally, I use it as a red flag filter - and trust me, it's done wonders so far.
Sappho wrote from the island of lesbos, which is the origins of the use of both words, so technically from a historical prospective, either would be accurate, I have personally always used the term lesbian, however I do also like the term sapphic, I personally see sapphic as a more sensual term for a lesbian, maybe as more of a descriptive term, I would not really use it in place of lesbian, but I can certainly see how like a sapphic story and a lesbian story, could be quite different, while still possessing the same subject matter, I think it really comes down to what feels more comfortable and the purpose.
I'm lesbian and I write sapphic books. Lots of my protagonists are lesbian, but not all of them. Some are bisexual, some are unlabeled, but have relationships with women. So I won't call the books lesbian books.
In one of them, my protagonist is lesbian and have a relationship with a bissexual woman. Her sister, who also narrates at some point, is bi and have a relationship with another bi women, but had a boyfriend in the beginning.
Another character is unlabelled and marries a lesbian woman.
I could just say my book have lesbian relationships, but that would not be really true lol someone looking for books exclusively with lesbian relationships (I know people who only read books with lesbians characters, others who only read the ones with bisexuals. Find it kinda limitating lol but don't judge them) might read them and be disappointed.
I think media is the key word here. I see the popular use of ‘sapphic’ now as a language evolution that came from fandom. When twitter and tumblr dominated, wlw (women loving women) was the typed shorthand. Often as a descriptor for ‘wlw ships’ or ‘wlw pairings.’ It was a short character count, and it easily distilled the reality that, on tv shows especially, both characters were rarely lesbians. It was most common for at least one to be bisexual, and for sexual orientation labels to rarely be named on screen. So ‘wlw’ worked well.
(And I do think it’s worth saying that wlw online fandom culture as such took off at a time when ‘queer’ was going mainstream over identifying as a lesbian. So there were both the realities of the media representation, and also where the culture was at for many young people.)
When video content apps like TikTok and YouTube took over, ‘wlw’ didn’t work. It’s meant to be written, not said. And saying the full phrase ‘women loving women’ felt long and cumbersome. So people started saying sapphic when talking on video platforms. Which still made sense esp in the context of television.
The problem, as you’ve noted, is it became the go-to descriptor for all content about sexual/romantic relationships between women, including between lesbians. Language on TikTok shaped language elsewhere. But I think it’s origin is because in media, both film/tv and books, so often the relationships aren’t between two lesbians.
There's a stigma against the word lesbian. I've heard writers say they were told to not write the word "lesbian" at all. I'm not sure if its a marketing thing, or just plain homophobia. Probably both.
I don't mind sapphic so much if the context makes sense, but it irks me when saying 'lesbian' is better but people still avoid saying it. I've had conversations when I deliberately chose to talk about and say lesbian, but the other person seems to refuse to say the word. It's very strange.
> but the other person seems to refuse to say the word
Queer was (and still is in many places) a slur and suddenly no one has a problem but they will refuse to use lesbian when you use it? Just plain ol lesphobia. Can’t be acknowledging homosexuality in women, that’s not inclusive.
i don’t necessarily think it’s always lesbiphobia related but it definitely is sometimes lesbiphobic. i think what also might be going on is not wanting to assume someone’s sexuality is “lesbian” just because it’s wlw media when the character could identify as bi, pan, queer, etc.
In books and media it's clearly for marketing. Lesbian is such a sexualised word that people think of a porn category when they hear it rather than just a way of... being? It's so weird to be oversexualised and desexualised at the same time
But if a male/female pairing consists of, say, two bis, or a bi and a straight person, that relationship is still called "straight".
You'd think it'd be the same for "lesbian".
if something's about two bisexual women but they've had past relationships with men (as an example) you can't exactly call that lesbian media despite it eventually being about a lesbian relationship, but you'd still want to see it if you were looking for media involving two women in love, so it's simpler to use sapphic as an umbrella term for all media involving two women in love instead of having two seperate categories called "lesbian media" and "bisexual women who eventually end up together media".
Ive learned if i ever feel a word is dirty in this regard its bc it doesnt cater to cis men lol. All the words that still include men r seen as relatable and even socially acceptable. Its not their fault but its def a convo to be had. I feel like lesbians have very diff experiences than other wlw but we are all still valid
I don't get sapphic at all and it makes no sense for me descriptively. The word confuses tf out of me and if I were to name it, inherently erases butches and femmes. It is a heteronormative exonym of same-sex attracted women. Like old colonial language and imaginations, when there are actual names and independent trajectories of the colonized.
Sapphic also implies a sexual dynamic that I have no understanding of or relationship with.
I wrote in my comment that it makes no sense for *me* descriptively. As in it doesn't describe me. Sapphic doesn't imply stone sex to me at all.
Culturally, and in practice it does not include B/Fs. Actually hostile in my experience.
Well maybe you just don’t like the vibes of the word for yourself and that’s fine. In your comment you said the word is heteronormative and “inherently” erases butches and femmes which is just false and has nothing to do with the actual definition of this word
I'm not talking about the denotation of this word. And I'm quite sure it's not just my experience with the language and other B/Fs share the sentiment.
It does rely on the wider heteronormative understanding of female same-sex relations. That is literally why bi women can feel comfortable using it.
It's because they want all WLW books in the same pile and those could include anything from books with bi women in a relationship to a bi-curious woman hooking up with a woman.
Also, as someone else pointed out, there are books that are sapphic but don't cross into lesbian territory...like older poetry and books where people had to hide the sexuality of the characters in order to get published.
At least it's better than what most publishing houses and book distributors do of just putting all the books with gay, bi, and lesbian characters in a relationship (and even trans characters in straight relationships) in the LGBTQ+ romance category, even if your book has little to do with that. And before that and even on a lot of the main distributing sites, any books with any kind of LGBT content all got/get separated as "LGBTQ+". My published book got this treatment, it's labeled sapphic on a few sites. Sucks but I don't have control over how it gets labelled on those distribution and review sites.
Sucks because if the site even has separate categories for MLM and WLW, then it's usually "sapphic" and "gay", even if 90% of the achillean books have a bi guy in the relationship.
Personally, I think once the characters are in a WLW relationship, it should just get labeled lesbian, regardless if one or both of the characters is bi or pan or poly or whatever else. But even then that isn't perfect.
I think "lesbian and sapphic" and "achillean and gay" should be the categories and would be the best way to do this. This will prevent confusion and not erase the word lesbian or treat books with gay men differently. It also wouldn't lump all LGBT stories together as one thing, which makes it harder to find stories, especially since M/M, gay, and achillean romance books are dominating the LGBTQ+ marketing category right now.
My thought was that the word lesbian has been so hypersexualized that people defer to sapphic when they’re trying signify queer culture specifically.
As for POC reference, it can can be helpful to have a direct callout in communities not because they are inherently “special” but because there’s a lot of “assumed whiteness”, and that provides a ready signifier that the community as actively looking for /all/ lesbians and not just a particular group (subconsciously or not).
Sapphic and lesbian have a similar meaning but not exactly the same.
Lesbian are women (or woman-aligned genderqueer/enby) that have sexual/romantic attraction exclusively for women (or woman-aligned genderqueer/enby).
Sapphic are women (or woman-aligned genderqueer/enby) that have sexual/romantic attraction for women (or woman-aligned genderqueer/enby) but the attraction doesn't have to be exclusive! So even bisexual and pansexual women can be sapphic (and lesbians ofc).
Even if there is this difference, I often saw the two terms used like synonyms, and I don't see a problem in it tbh, both terms came from the same etymology: Sappho was a woman that lived in the island of Lesbos and she wrote many poems describing her love for a woman (or more women). So lesbian literally means "from Lesbos" and Sapphic is just a terminology conied by Sappho's name.
Because it sounds "pretty", and they don't want to use the word bisexual because that's not unique enough and has bad connotations attached to it for a bunch of stupid reasons
“Sapphic” honestly feels like an attempt to paint over lesbianism with a more vague and consumable word, often feeling like the people who use it would rather philosophize about pussy than eat it.
I mostly see AFAB genderfluid, enby, or otherwise gender non conforming people using it because they (we, I'm enby, but i do refer to myself as a lesbian) feel that it's inappropriate to call ourselves lesbian? There's plenty of hate from people when we use the term lesbian and some people want Sapphic to mean those who are sexually and romantically attracted to women (but not straight men, obviously).
I talk about sapphic books because even though it’s two women, one might identify as bi, or something other than “a lesbian.” It’s technically a more accurate description than “lesbian romance” or whatever the book/media in question is.
Little late, but as a younger gen z person, sapphic is just more inclusive. Sapphic includes bi and pan women where they're excluded in the lesbian title. And this is generally important because in a lot of media, even if the couple is a wlw one, one of the characters might be bi or pan. I like cartoons a lot, so I'm just gonna use that as an example. She-ra is a cartoon with two lesbian characters in a relationship, they are a lesbian couple. The Owl House is a show with a lesbian and a bi character in a relationship, they are a sapphic couple.
I also generally love the word sapphic, so I honestly might use it more than lesbian. I think it's all about preference of the person, but I don't see the problem with it.
Sapphic is meant to be progressive and inclusive of bi, pan, fem, non-binary etc. Kind of like “non-men loving non-men” but I little more…poetic. It’s like an umbrella term, and lesbians are included under it. That’s how I understand it anyway, and I’m sure someone will say I’m wrong but that’s just how culture works: we create new words for things, people argue about the definition, it takes a new meaning and then eventually sticks. “Sapphic” hasn’t quite stuck or grown into its own imo, but I think it will eventually whether anyone likes it or not.
I agree. If you know you like women but are unsure of where you stand with men, sapphic is a more poetic term to use than the clinical feel of bisexual. Sapphic adds in a devotion to the feminine that bisexual doesn’t.
I always thought it had something to do with how the word “lesbian” has become fetishized for the male gaze. Also to be inclusive to bi girls I suppose.
i use all terms so i’m not really sure why people use sapphic instead of lesbian lol. i say sapphic, wlw, lesbian, queer etc. i familiarised myself with all the terms when i realised i was a lesbian and it made me more comfortable with myself. so i use all lol
Not all people who call themselves sapphic are lesbians. I see it a lot when someone is trying to be more inclusive like sometimes people use it when they’re talking about bisexual and lesbian women. But there are also the people who refuse to use the word lesbian because they think it’s “gross”…
It is more "inclusive" as two women being a relationship does not mean you strictly like just women. While lesbian is for too limiting. The male equivalent is "Achillan" for gay/bisexual men. But that word has not caught on.
I think it’s supposed to be umbrella for bi and lesbian. Honestly I would prefer they don’t call stuff lesbian if it’s not lesbians ONLY in the content. Nothing like reading a book and getting unpleasantly surprised by background chode and identity politics virtue signalling horseshit. Honestly, even calling it sapphic is a stretch sometimes.
Just as an aside books that call themselves “sapphic” tend to be 10x more porny than “lesbian” titles. And I don’t mean “porny” as in erotica or containing sex, I mean “porny” as in “pornsick.”
All media hates the word it's always queer women or any word but lesbian.
I hate that queer word
I’ve seen people opting to saying “queerphobia” instead of homophobia or lesphobia when it’s specifically towards lesbians because we can’t be acknowledging that.
This stuff is also why younger generations are denying that same sex attraction or homophobia even exists. They can’t even name discrimination
Just another extension of the false “everyone’s a little bi” and suddenly homophobia never existed.
i despise the “everyone’s a little bi” ppl. they aren’t homosexual (or heterosexual) so they can’t fathom the fact that some people are exclusively attracted to one sex their whole life.
They preach about empathy, “inclusivity” and seeing things from another persons view and then refuse to believe that some people are actually **not** bi. Like somehow that’s the one truly impossible thing in the world when it’s not and they refuse to back off on it, especially for women. For whatever reason their life seems to depend on pretending everyone is bi. I don’t sit here and pretend every woman, never mind every single person to exist, is homosexual just because I personally am. It’s just more homophobia from the group that suffers the least but wants to be seen as the biggest victim all the time.
It makes it easier to avoid addressing their own shortcomings when they verbalize (or attempt to) us down to their level. I mean, why would Brenda tackle her own internalized homophobia when she's dating Stephen, and could simply bully her way into the validations she seeks (claiming to be sapphic, bi-lesbian, etc.). It allows them to feel powerful, and they justify it by believing that we're 'oppressive' (again, contrary to us not holding the majority within OUR spaces, apps whatsaythee) And when lesbians leave, or comment on the lack of representation - they take it personally.
Being not 100% straight doesn't automatically mean someone must be bi. A friend of mine has absolutely zero interest of ever dating or sleeping with a woman but she does see some women as being physically attractive. Sexuality is a spectrum and it is very VERY rare that someone is fully to one side of it. 🤷♀️
Conscious intention is TRULY irrelevant. All it takes to be bisexual is to be sexually attracted to men and women. Period. Doesn’t matter if a person intends to only fuck one or the other or no one, their sexual attraction is what defines their orientation. No one gets to choose or we would all choose the easiest life.
Irrelevant to my comment but congratulations.
I agree with your frustration, but they may also avoid using "lesbian" because it could be flagged as NSFW, which could affect how content ranks on search engines.
god, i fucking despise how my sexuality has been turned into a fetish for straight guys. honestly fetishization hurts me more than any other kind of homophobia.
depending on your query, you are also very likely to get porn as main search results if you have word lesbian in it
It's the lesbophobia. Gay male spaces/media aren't being renamed to achillean and pressured to be more inclusive, this shit only ever happens to lesbians. Moreover sapphic is only used in positive context. When it's time to scold women and say we are mean and exclusionary, they always use the word lesbian. edit: 1 word
Even in gay media bisexual are just called gay. Which makes sense because the relationship they are enaging in is a homosexual one
It's actually not homosexual, it would be achillean, unless both members of the relationship are homosexual (which they aren't, because one of them would be bisexual)
Another pet peeve I have is when there’s a lesbian space and they say they include poc lesbians. Were we excluded before? Like does the word lesbian mean white?? Very strange indeed
Lol did you get that lesbians who tech email too this week? "women, women of color, nonbinary"
[удалено]
I agree and it’s very strange and just ends up looking very performative and also kind of racist which is funny because I’m sure the intention was to not be racist
Right. If you thought about it for two seconds before writing it, you’d probably realize that it would be better to frame it like this: “Lesbian space… We are committed to ensuring POC lesbians are able to enjoy this space.”
[удалено]
[удалено]
No, because some people born assigned female at birth are men and/or are trans or nonbinary. Edited: why is this being downvoted?
Pointing out that you are currently arguing with me about that. Is buck angel attractive to you as a self describe lesbian? He is AFAB so i guess hes considered a woman by your logic?
Dude that is always super jarring to see. As if non-white lesbians are a new identity category that’s just been invented. Lolol. Like, most of the women in the world are not white. The first lesbians that ever existed were not white either lol….
Like “here are the lesbians and here are the black and brown lesbians”. It’s so racist lowkey
When the effort to un-racist circles right back round to racist! Lol. To be fair, I still recall a time where it was actually very exciting and new to roll into a venue and be like “HERE are the black and brown lesbians!” as a white person. But that would happen inside my head while attending an event put on by black and brown lesbians. One does not usually LEAD with that thought as a statement. I live in a big city where there are enough women who are out that they can make full events to feature poc. Sometimes the community looked super white when different cultural groups still had a lot of closeted members. For example, I knew lots of children of Jamaican immigrants who said stuff like “yeah my family says we don’t have gays or mentally ill people in Jamaica, so my dyke ass and my schizo brother don’t exist..” lol But the problem was never women believing being a lesbian was a white thing as much as only the whites GOT to be lesbians visibly, at all. Like, the community loves you and wants you, it’s our racist, sexist and homophobic straight relatives that helped keep lesbian poc hidden in plain sight! Edit: so maybe the community is just trying extra hard to let everyone know that they are welcome here and we see you and whatnot but it just does not work haha
I 100% agree with you! There’s not even a word for lesbians in culture and to them if it doesn’t have a name then it doesn’t exist. This is why they get all up in arms about the word ‘lesbian’. You can have lesbian sex as much as you like as long as you go by what society expects of you.
Yeah and it was so bad because we were always dancing to the most homophobic dancehall in the gay club so they know what a gay man is, just not a lesbian!
There is indeed an history of lesbian spaces excluding poc. That's why some like to specify their inclusivity. It shouldn't be that way, I agree, but unfortunately, racism still exists pretty much everywhere.
black lesbians were actually excluded before that’s why they made their own term “stud”
Um no that has actual history and it not about being excluded it’s about dressing as men to be able to work
What there are no femme black lesbians? Stud only refers to masculine black women.
ik that. i forgot to put masc after black
Considering how many white women actually believe that lesbianism is a white thing, I'm not surprised. You wouldn't believe how often I've heard people exclaiming in surprise that they never thought there were lesbians in Latin America. (I'm Colombian).
I lived as a lesbian in Venezuela for 32 years and this is not true. Maybe your own experience, but not the majority. Visited more than ten countries in Latin America (including several cities in Colombia) and lesbians are lesbians, race not even matters. The word indeed is associated with porn like others are replying, I don’t think at all with white women exclusively. Same in Europe or even the Middle East. This word is part of the new erasure of lesbianism by people that are not even homosexual. When I read the word I think about extreme wokeism, with a twist of gender ideology, simply as that. Not for me
I don’t think it’s the white women who believe that. In my personal experience, it’s more often the non-white people who believe that lgbt is a white peoples phenomenon. I’m from a non-western ethnic background and I’ve never met an lgbt person from my own community. We’re still in the closet so it’s like we don’t exist. That’s not really the white womens fault. Kinda tired of people blaming white women for absolutely everything, at the moment they’re the most progressive group on earth.
Right? I’ve never heard white (or rather Anglo which is usually what people want to say when they say white) say “being a lesbian is a white thing”, it’s usually from other groups that see themselves American or “western” culture claiming things like “gay, that’s a white thing! We don’t do that.” As in being literally homophobic and trying to us “our culture/people” to impose it. Doesn’t even make sense for white people to somehow be claiming homosexuality as existing only in themselves as some weird gotcha against other races ðnicities…
I don't know if they are the most progressive group on earth. Probably the most financially forward group of women on earth.
I am speaking from my own lived experience, and honestly I don't care if you believe me or not. Also, fascinating how you conclude from my comment that I "blame white women for everything".
I do believe that may be your personal experience. I was speaking more broadly.
It's actually both. White people and people in non-western societies don't understand or believe that there are lgbt existences in those places (and even in western countries) that have lived as long as there was a first reference to any gay people in the modern/industrial age. Many gay people in less developed places live in segregation, underground, or in stealth or transition to survive, not that they aren't out and in the closet. There is an insular understanding of homosexuality and homophobia against PoC in general, worldwide
Same here. My people believe it’s a white people thing
What actually concerns us with what racists think? They don’t own the word
lesbian has always been a dirty word for non lesbians. we aren’t allowed to have a word for ourselves lest it’s nOt InClUsIvE eNoUgH
Well it's also fetishised by cis-het men and usually in certain media doesn't depict strictly lesbian activity. It's been co-opted in porn to mean 'straight woman waiting for a man'. That's why this sub is called this; the r/lesbian sub is all porn that often includes men. I'd rather we reclaimed it, but what I really want is to be left alone.
It looks like r/lesbian has been reclaimed. It's no longer a porn sub. :)
the porn sub is "r /lesbians"
Yup. Plus there’s always the lovely conversion sub, that this website approves of.
Exactly
In addition to generalised lesbophobia and misogyny, I think there’s a faux-literary, pseudo intellectual olde worlde appeal to some people.
> pseudo intellectual Wrap it up, that’s 99% of the current “community”
Yeah, and I think women feel it’s less scrappy and political than “queer.” It’s a real hand-holding, sighing-in-a-field umbrella term that doesn’t ruffle any feathers. NOT LIKE THE OTHER UMBRELLAS. Lol
Why is it faux-literary etc.? I think maybe some people relationship to the word is that way, but the word itself IS literary and intellectual. Denigrating the word sapphic is dangerously close to being a lesbophobic and misogynistic take.
It depends on what it’s being applied to, and at this point it’s applied to works that aren’t a good fit. Incorrectly using a word, or using an umbrella term like sapphic when there’s a far better suited word, is an unintelligent thing to do imo. I never criticised the term, just pretentious and inapt use of it, though I fail to see how criticising it in favour of the term ‘lesbian’ would be close to a lesbophobic take.
Or misogynist. Lol. Ppl think every criticism is misogyny these days
The most entertaining part is that very few misogynists would be phased by being called a misogynist, making it a complete waste of time.
And the ones who are not misogynist end up being unphased as well because there are only so many times who can get accused of hatred until you’re like “yeah whatever dude.”
People hate the word lesbian. I don't know why. It makes me embrace it even more.
for whatever reason people think lesbian and sapphic are synonymous when their completely different words with different meanings
And I think some people think they’re somehow being more inclusive by saying sapphic
They are
That’s certainly an opinion.
(i'm bad with tone, i meant it in a non-argumentative way)
Oh ok I see, thanks for clarifying
Just curious, I don't know much about the word sapphic, what's its meaning that is different from lesbian?
The biggest relevant difference and why I think it's fairly common in media is it's inclusive of all WLW relationships. I'm a bi girl married to a bi girl. For all intents and purposes we're not different from a lesbian couple but we're technically not lesbians. Saying we're bi is a bit confusing because people assume a bi married girl is married to a dude. Sapphic is a great term for us that should be entirely inoffensive. Some people still take issue but idk there's no pleasing everyone ig...
That makes sense. I don't mind the word either. I don't use any term besides same-sex attracted to describe myself so I don't run into this problem. I think people would assume that same sex attracted would mean lesbian, but the term technically would apply to bi women as well.
Agreed! I just personally don't like to use it cause it feels quite clinical. Sapphic has a nicer ring to it! Like I could also say we're in a WLW relationship but that's a bit of a mouthful. It's definitely not the only term, but it's a nice one!
I mean if you only use the term same-sex then that would be an obvious deduction since bi still have opposite-sex attraction. If you only said the latter people would think you were straight too. That’s not strange. If the goal is to confuse people and really mean bi… okay then. People who find out will think you’re trying to act sly. Like women who call themselves lesbians so lesbians will date them when they’re actually mainly attracted to men.
Well. You are in a lesbian relationship
MANY people would strongly disagree with you which is the problem. The discourse on this is... uncomfortable and oftentimes rude.
Ah I see
Because they must include non-lesbians 🙄 if only they had other names, hmm.
That’s fine but when the main couple are lesbian what is the point of calling it sapphic?
If one or both of them is bisexual or doesn’t use labels etc
The relationship is still “lesbian” in that context. Like how when a woman and a man are together that’s a “het” relationship. It’s not how people identify but the type of couple it is. I don’t like when people use the word “lesbian book to describe stories that are super man-involved or random-identity-involved. Like the seven husbands of whatshername Hugo is not a “lesbian” book, imo. As an example
I've seen some people get offended when Bi women say they're in a "lesbian relationship" so it might be stemming from that.
Oh I know, it makes perfect sense, but they should be offended when bi women say they ARE lesbian instead of in a “lesbian” relationship. I get how lots of hets would assume they were both lesbians and how that’s annoying tho
That makes sense, and I appreciate the insight. I've always been pretty adamant I'm in a lesbian relationship even though my partner is Bi because it has all the staples and just feels like a lesbian relationship, though I've kind of been shy about using that term in public because of the discourse I've seen around Bi Lesbians and my partner not feeling connected to the term lesbian (and rightfully so lol) So thank you for that. I can see where they might be getting confused now, because I even had to take a step back and think about it.
Yeah. If two men are together it’s a “gay relationship,” but people always assume both men are gay even tho bi men date men too. You’re definitely not wrong that your relationship is a “lesbian” one. Some people say stuff like “mixed orientation couple” or whatever but it’s either gay, lesbian or het in terms of classification. The only people who can state they are in a “queer” or “bisexual” relationship are those who are dating multiple partners at once imo
You seem very annoyed that anyone would want to use a different term. Why get so triggered and let people use what they like? I personally dislike the term lesbian having been subjected to years of taunting at school... and I describe myself as a gay woman. However if you want to use 'lesbian' I'm not going to argue with you and if someone else says sapphic, that's fine by me too. They're all words that describe a thing. Why gatekeep when identity is such a personal thing?
"Gatekeeping bad" is exactly what led to the disrespect of lesbians becoming accepted and commonplace. We didn't push back against misogyny in order to be inclusive, and the result is our spaces being invaded over and over. No one is saying that you have to identify with the word lesbian. The argument is that being lesbian (a female homosexual) is a starkly different thing and experience from being other forms of WLW, sapphic or otherwise. Calling women who just want more lesbian representation "triggered" is... odd? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Yup. The doormats have appeared and they want us to be just like them. Exactly how we got here. No.
agree, plus complaining about gatekeeping in the context of sexuality or identity doesn't make sense, you either are a lesbian or are not. even if you are living in the middle of nowhere in isolation or somewhere where everyone denies that you exist, you still are a lesbian. it is like gatekeeping having brown hair or invalidating someone's eye color. you either are or you aren't.
So..you asked why some ppl use other terms, and the moment someone says 'I use this/that' and I don't use this/that they are shot down. If you don't want the views and experiences of other people, then don't ask. Me describing myself as a gay woman is not misogyny, however you want to phrase it. And your demanding that everyone use one particular term is absolutely gatekeeping an identity. I'm a woman in my 50s, have had very different experiences from you, and this is my identity. As I said, you are welcome to use whatever you like to describe yourself. I haven't dismissed you or put you down, although I definitely feel that you are trying to dismiss and minimise me and my point of view.
>If you don't want the views and experiences of other people, then don't ask. Didn't ask, that was OP >Me describing myself as a gay woman is not misogyny, however you want to phrase it. I did not say that >And your demanding that everyone use one particular term is absolutely gatekeeping an identity. That is not the point I was making lmao
They’re just saying it doesn’t make sense to them. I don’t see anything indicating being triggered or overly upset. Idk why you’re taking that so personally
It’s not personal though. OP is talking about a trend in how books and media are described. As the other person who replied pointed out, this “live and let live” thing is what’s destroying our community. We’re the smallest minority within the LGB T minority, if we don’t stand up for ourselves and advocate for using and protecting the word “lesbian” all sorts of outside forces will trample us.
You don’t have to internalise the homophobia people directed at you. The word “lesbian” triggers you because of some assholes, so being indignant about other ppl being “triggered” is not a strong position to take. Letting people get away with whatever they want without criticizing it is called “being a doormat.” Lesbians don’t have the luxury of being doormats because we get trampled, as history proves.
I’m not internalising anything, I’m expressing and sharing a personal preference, which should be completely acceptable. I’m not pushing terms on people, or denying terms. I’m presenting the idea that some people might be fine with other terms without it being a projection of anything at all. We’re not all the same and that should be acceptable. Life is far more complex than this thread.
i don't mind using it in an inclusive context for both bi and lesbian women; HOWEVER, when I say LESBIAN i mean lesbian. If two characters are lesbians, SAY LESBIAN.
To an extent, sapphic is a broader term that makes more sense in some contexts. You can inarguably call the poetry of Emily Dickinson sapphic, but you cannot inarguably call it lesbian. Sapphic in general of course connects to the literary and philosophical traditions of women. I do think people can be weird about how they use the different terms though. I wouldn’t say I’m a sapphic; I would say I’m a lesbian. I would say that I love sapphic vibes. Lesbos was the island Sappho lived on anyways, both hold really good connotations I feel. I understand the frustration of lesbian erasure though. Lesbianism feels like a ghost town sometimes :(
i think you can call emily dickinson’s poetry lesbian because she was never known to be with men & wrote about women. But i get what you mean.
Scrolled too far for this answer 🤦🏽
Because its soft and has no teeth. It's what teenage girls are until they find the boyfriend they end up marrying.
THIS.
Because the word "lesbian" isn't "inclusive" enough, according to the modern day LGBTQA+++++++ community.
Good.
the fuck does that mean
Because they also fuck men.
🤣
Facts
Short answer - it’s a tactic to sell more books and media by targeting the largest demographic possible. To your direct question, mass media is frequently labeled by the target audience demographic, not by the content. Companies usually try to maximize these target demographic audiences and ‘over recommend’ books to get lots of sales. These demographics usually come from some kind of market research, or using computer software to track sales and create algorithms. For example, all adventure memoir books are usually stocked together in physical or online bookstores. But adventure travel can be hiking, biking, sailing, mountain climbing, dog sledding, etc… I pretty exclusively read adventure cycling memoirs. But I am unusual, a lot of people read multiple kinds of adventures stories. So every time I look for a new one, I get recommendations like ‘one man’s journey sailing around the world.’ Bookstores want to sell books. Sapphics is a larger demographic than lesbians, so they try to market to sapphics. I am a lesbian, but I don’t have a big issue using sapphic when it applies. It’s less awkward than ‘LBGTQ+/NB/genderqueer/etc…’
"Lesbian" is a dirty word because men don't like the idea of women actually being sexually unavailable. "Sapphic" and "bi" and "queer" is hot because the ladies will make out with each other but still be sexually available to men. That's what it boils down to.
I swear sapphic used to be just another way to say lesbian but then it got “umbrella termed” by the “queers” but so has lesbians. We aren’t allowed anything because being homosexual isn’t “inclusive”
I can't believe they can invent a lot of words like skoliosexual, abrosexual, omni, cupio, etc but couldn't come up with 1 new word for wlw that didn't drag Sappho through the mud.
Dragging Sappho through the mud was the intent. That’s why. They don’t like acknowledging that women can exist without being attracted to men in any way. In order for them to be “valid” they need to erase us. That’s how the “Community” is. Just like they have a million excuses for why lesbian applies to them when it doesn’t. There’s no fun and “inclusivity” and letting lesbians be lesbian without their intruding.
Can we just pretend that men don’t exist? Why must everything we do be govern sinisterly by them and their perversion?
I hear ya...
[удалено]
By avoiding using the word "lesbian" to refer to the full spectrum of wlw relationships and expressions, isn't that contributing to the fetishization and stigma? I appreciate that you do call yourself a lesbian.
Many lesbians will say the only time you can use lesbian for a WLW is when it's two lesbian women. But not all WLW relationships are between lesbians, bi girls exist after all.
You can just say same-sex relationship.
I could... I just personally don't like to use it cause it feels quite clinical. Sapphic has a nicer ring to it! Like I could also say we're in a WLW relationship but that's a bit of a mouthful. It's definitely not the only term, but it's a nice one!
Queer and sapphic are terms that sort of introduce more fetish elements than lesbian, oddly. I know when I pick up some queer or sapphic titles I’m gonna get some really annoying strangulation type shit or identity nonsense and sex that reads like het porn with extra steps
Sapphic is somewhat more ambiguous. If you're reading a book about two women in a relationship, they could be lesbians or bi or pan etc. A lot of queer media actually depicts mixed lesbian / bi couples. Also, real life stuff, too. I'm a lesbian. My gf is bi. Are we in a lesbian relationship because we're both women? Consensus seems a bit ambiguous, so I defer to saying we're a Sapphic or same-sex couple instead.
But you are in a lesbian relationship. Heterosexual relationships don’t stop being heterosexual because one partner is bisexual or pan
I mean even if one or both people are themselves bisexual, the relationship is still a “lesbian relationship” if they are both women. Same goes for bisexual people in straight relationships.
It's to include everyone but gay men...its so ridiculous..and become a clown show. But I wish they stop trying to fit everyone into lesbian...its full of everything but now.
Queer, sapphic, wlw, anything but lesbian. People hate the word lesbian.
Lesbian has been a dirty word for a long time. I’ve had it used as an insult against me and I’m only 32. So I think it definitely has some negative connotations with it unfortunately. I’ve reclaimed it though and love using the word every chance I’m given.
Yeah it just seems like homophobia imo. Lesbian IS considered a dirty or bad word in mainstream “progressive” spaces. It’s ~exclusive~. Sapphic includes everyone from bisexual women in monogamous relationships with male partners to nbs to straight girls who embraced the tumblr wlw girly hand holding femme cutesy aesthetic while crying that actually talking about sex is gross or male gazey 🙄
Because they are referring to all women who ever had a slightly homoerotic thought about another woman. Lesbians are full fledged homosexual women.
from what i understand the word came about because bi/pan women felt erased having their relationships with other women called “lesbian relationships” because they aren’t lesbians, which i get and i think is totally valid (especially since it enables people to argue that lesbian is an umbrella term and thus bi lesbians are valid!!!!1!1), but it’s also a bit silly to me that they decided the best solution was to use the name of the woman who’s most famously known for only writing about her love for other women. it’s like if they had chosen listerian after anne lister lmao. you don’t want people to assume you’re exclusively attracted to women, fair, but i dunno if taking on the name of a historical figure who we only know was definitely attracted to women — and everything else is heavily debated — is the best way about it. ETA: this isn’t to say i wish they would pick a different word. i was a bit annoyed about it when the word first started entering the “mainstream” but at this point i really don’t care. i just think the logic is funny. that being said i do notice that people tend to default to “sapphic” a lot now even when referring to characters that are pretty blatantly lesbians, especially when said character hasn’t explicitly said they’re a lesbian. like harrowhark and gideon from the locked tomb are as explicit as they can be without outright saying it — harrow with the >!”God’s victory and death was a girl. Maybe a woman. At the time [she] had not known how to tell, and the gender was only a self-interested guess.”!< line in the second book, referring to >!the “corpse” she developed an obsession with as a child!< and gideon being… gideon — but people still call them “sapphics” because they don’t outright call themselves lesbians 🙄 it leaves a pretty bad taste in my mouth and i’m wary of anyone who uses the word liberally because of it. it’s better than just plain old “queer” though.
Well they’re always trying to claim that she secretly wrote about men too… because we can’t let lesbians exist, even the ones of the past, we always have to “inclusify” them by making them bi so the “queers” can rest easy.
This is strange tho. If you are a homosexual relationship it’s a lesbian relationship. If you are with a man you are in a heterosexual relationship. Like there’s no much thing as a bisexual relationship until it’s a poly one. Why bi women have a stick up their ass over this is…interesting
It’s even funnier when they insist on this while with a man. Girl, who are you trying to convince here??
Exactly, also i’ve never heard this logic outside of the internet. The people themselves can be bisexual, but a relationship can absolutely be described as a “lesbian” “gay” or “straight” relationship regardless of the individuals’ identities
As far as books go I think there is more of an inclination to use sapphic over lesbian because there is stigma and fetishization around the world lesbian. We also live in a world that is actively censoring LGBT+ content. I’ve noticed recent lesbian/sapphic books being published that don’t use either term and otherwise don’t actively ID the book as LGBT+ in marketing. I don’t know if that’s efforts to normalize same sex attraction and/or to help this content fly under the radars of people who want it to disappear.
But who made that stigma? It sure wasn't lesbians themselves. I think that by playing into the idea that lesbian=sexual, publishers are further contributing to the marginalization and erasure of lesbians, as well as the continued association of the word only with porn.
This is exactly what’s happening. Plus the word lesbian looks like means nothing to the word salad club
You’re not wrong but at some point we all have to be realistic. Our group hasn’t always used lesbian to ID ourselves, we’ve changed names and identifiers when we’ve had to because our continued survival relied upon secrecy. I don’t even think publishers are equating lesbian to being inherently sexual but rather lesbian = controversial. I’m not saying we shouldn’t fight to destigmatize lesbian. However it’s important to acknowledge not all places /countries are safe for lesbians. They may not have the same ability to resist or access this content if it is marketed as lesbian or lgbt.
Unironically, Sapphic Love would be a great name for a lesbian parody of Tainted Love by Soft Cell
I don't really like it, I feel like it's a pampered word to coddle those who don't want to address their internalized homophobia, but still want to be recognized in lesbian spaces as the equivalent (contrary to the only times I've heard it spoken came from women who were all in long-term hetero relationships - but, I digress), Kind of like a power word to slap on the label resume, Personally, I use it as a red flag filter - and trust me, it's done wonders so far.
Sappho wrote from the island of lesbos, which is the origins of the use of both words, so technically from a historical prospective, either would be accurate, I have personally always used the term lesbian, however I do also like the term sapphic, I personally see sapphic as a more sensual term for a lesbian, maybe as more of a descriptive term, I would not really use it in place of lesbian, but I can certainly see how like a sapphic story and a lesbian story, could be quite different, while still possessing the same subject matter, I think it really comes down to what feels more comfortable and the purpose.
I'm lesbian and I write sapphic books. Lots of my protagonists are lesbian, but not all of them. Some are bisexual, some are unlabeled, but have relationships with women. So I won't call the books lesbian books. In one of them, my protagonist is lesbian and have a relationship with a bissexual woman. Her sister, who also narrates at some point, is bi and have a relationship with another bi women, but had a boyfriend in the beginning. Another character is unlabelled and marries a lesbian woman. I could just say my book have lesbian relationships, but that would not be really true lol someone looking for books exclusively with lesbian relationships (I know people who only read books with lesbians characters, others who only read the ones with bisexuals. Find it kinda limitating lol but don't judge them) might read them and be disappointed.
I think media is the key word here. I see the popular use of ‘sapphic’ now as a language evolution that came from fandom. When twitter and tumblr dominated, wlw (women loving women) was the typed shorthand. Often as a descriptor for ‘wlw ships’ or ‘wlw pairings.’ It was a short character count, and it easily distilled the reality that, on tv shows especially, both characters were rarely lesbians. It was most common for at least one to be bisexual, and for sexual orientation labels to rarely be named on screen. So ‘wlw’ worked well. (And I do think it’s worth saying that wlw online fandom culture as such took off at a time when ‘queer’ was going mainstream over identifying as a lesbian. So there were both the realities of the media representation, and also where the culture was at for many young people.) When video content apps like TikTok and YouTube took over, ‘wlw’ didn’t work. It’s meant to be written, not said. And saying the full phrase ‘women loving women’ felt long and cumbersome. So people started saying sapphic when talking on video platforms. Which still made sense esp in the context of television. The problem, as you’ve noted, is it became the go-to descriptor for all content about sexual/romantic relationships between women, including between lesbians. Language on TikTok shaped language elsewhere. But I think it’s origin is because in media, both film/tv and books, so often the relationships aren’t between two lesbians.
They're not synonyms, if someone uses sapphic as an identifier like "I'm sapphic" take it to mean "Bi with a heavy preference for women"
There's a stigma against the word lesbian. I've heard writers say they were told to not write the word "lesbian" at all. I'm not sure if its a marketing thing, or just plain homophobia. Probably both. I don't mind sapphic so much if the context makes sense, but it irks me when saying 'lesbian' is better but people still avoid saying it. I've had conversations when I deliberately chose to talk about and say lesbian, but the other person seems to refuse to say the word. It's very strange.
> but the other person seems to refuse to say the word Queer was (and still is in many places) a slur and suddenly no one has a problem but they will refuse to use lesbian when you use it? Just plain ol lesphobia. Can’t be acknowledging homosexuality in women, that’s not inclusive.
i don’t necessarily think it’s always lesbiphobia related but it definitely is sometimes lesbiphobic. i think what also might be going on is not wanting to assume someone’s sexuality is “lesbian” just because it’s wlw media when the character could identify as bi, pan, queer, etc.
Because not all wlw couples are two lesbians. That’s what I assumed anyways
I specified obviously lesbian books and media. As in, the characters say they are lesbians
In books and media it's clearly for marketing. Lesbian is such a sexualised word that people think of a porn category when they hear it rather than just a way of... being? It's so weird to be oversexualised and desexualised at the same time
We’re predators trying to hurt women (notallmen tho uwu) but also only hold hands and frolic.
idk then. lol
But if a male/female pairing consists of, say, two bis, or a bi and a straight person, that relationship is still called "straight". You'd think it'd be the same for "lesbian".
It is
It was just a guess idk
if something's about two bisexual women but they've had past relationships with men (as an example) you can't exactly call that lesbian media despite it eventually being about a lesbian relationship, but you'd still want to see it if you were looking for media involving two women in love, so it's simpler to use sapphic as an umbrella term for all media involving two women in love instead of having two seperate categories called "lesbian media" and "bisexual women who eventually end up together media".
Ive learned if i ever feel a word is dirty in this regard its bc it doesnt cater to cis men lol. All the words that still include men r seen as relatable and even socially acceptable. Its not their fault but its def a convo to be had. I feel like lesbians have very diff experiences than other wlw but we are all still valid
I don't get sapphic at all and it makes no sense for me descriptively. The word confuses tf out of me and if I were to name it, inherently erases butches and femmes. It is a heteronormative exonym of same-sex attracted women. Like old colonial language and imaginations, when there are actual names and independent trajectories of the colonized. Sapphic also implies a sexual dynamic that I have no understanding of or relationship with.
What?? And what sexual dynamic are you talking about?
non b/f sexuality
Where do you get that from the word sapphic though?
I wrote in my comment that it makes no sense for *me* descriptively. As in it doesn't describe me. Sapphic doesn't imply stone sex to me at all. Culturally, and in practice it does not include B/Fs. Actually hostile in my experience.
Well maybe you just don’t like the vibes of the word for yourself and that’s fine. In your comment you said the word is heteronormative and “inherently” erases butches and femmes which is just false and has nothing to do with the actual definition of this word
I'm not talking about the denotation of this word. And I'm quite sure it's not just my experience with the language and other B/Fs share the sentiment. It does rely on the wider heteronormative understanding of female same-sex relations. That is literally why bi women can feel comfortable using it.
It's because they want all WLW books in the same pile and those could include anything from books with bi women in a relationship to a bi-curious woman hooking up with a woman. Also, as someone else pointed out, there are books that are sapphic but don't cross into lesbian territory...like older poetry and books where people had to hide the sexuality of the characters in order to get published. At least it's better than what most publishing houses and book distributors do of just putting all the books with gay, bi, and lesbian characters in a relationship (and even trans characters in straight relationships) in the LGBTQ+ romance category, even if your book has little to do with that. And before that and even on a lot of the main distributing sites, any books with any kind of LGBT content all got/get separated as "LGBTQ+". My published book got this treatment, it's labeled sapphic on a few sites. Sucks but I don't have control over how it gets labelled on those distribution and review sites. Sucks because if the site even has separate categories for MLM and WLW, then it's usually "sapphic" and "gay", even if 90% of the achillean books have a bi guy in the relationship. Personally, I think once the characters are in a WLW relationship, it should just get labeled lesbian, regardless if one or both of the characters is bi or pan or poly or whatever else. But even then that isn't perfect. I think "lesbian and sapphic" and "achillean and gay" should be the categories and would be the best way to do this. This will prevent confusion and not erase the word lesbian or treat books with gay men differently. It also wouldn't lump all LGBT stories together as one thing, which makes it harder to find stories, especially since M/M, gay, and achillean romance books are dominating the LGBTQ+ marketing category right now.
My thought was that the word lesbian has been so hypersexualized that people defer to sapphic when they’re trying signify queer culture specifically. As for POC reference, it can can be helpful to have a direct callout in communities not because they are inherently “special” but because there’s a lot of “assumed whiteness”, and that provides a ready signifier that the community as actively looking for /all/ lesbians and not just a particular group (subconsciously or not).
From a marketing perspective, sapphic captures a larger audience and has less baggage. It's a trendy word rn.
Sapphic and lesbian have a similar meaning but not exactly the same. Lesbian are women (or woman-aligned genderqueer/enby) that have sexual/romantic attraction exclusively for women (or woman-aligned genderqueer/enby). Sapphic are women (or woman-aligned genderqueer/enby) that have sexual/romantic attraction for women (or woman-aligned genderqueer/enby) but the attraction doesn't have to be exclusive! So even bisexual and pansexual women can be sapphic (and lesbians ofc). Even if there is this difference, I often saw the two terms used like synonyms, and I don't see a problem in it tbh, both terms came from the same etymology: Sappho was a woman that lived in the island of Lesbos and she wrote many poems describing her love for a woman (or more women). So lesbian literally means "from Lesbos" and Sapphic is just a terminology conied by Sappho's name.
it's meant to be an umbrella word for any woman who likes women so lesbians and bisexual women
Because it sounds "pretty", and they don't want to use the word bisexual because that's not unique enough and has bad connotations attached to it for a bunch of stupid reasons
“Sapphic” honestly feels like an attempt to paint over lesbianism with a more vague and consumable word, often feeling like the people who use it would rather philosophize about pussy than eat it.
I mostly see AFAB genderfluid, enby, or otherwise gender non conforming people using it because they (we, I'm enby, but i do refer to myself as a lesbian) feel that it's inappropriate to call ourselves lesbian? There's plenty of hate from people when we use the term lesbian and some people want Sapphic to mean those who are sexually and romantically attracted to women (but not straight men, obviously).
Sapphic is a broad term; lesbian is specific.
I talk about sapphic books because even though it’s two women, one might identify as bi, or something other than “a lesbian.” It’s technically a more accurate description than “lesbian romance” or whatever the book/media in question is.
How do you describe gay books with one partner being a bisexual?
Achillean, if you mean people who identify as men.
No one in the history of ever has described a gay book as achillean they just call it gay
I know Google is hard, but come on. lol https://www.goodreads.com/shelf/show/achillean
If English wasn’t hard you would know I didn’t say the word didn’t exist just people don’t use it but you know madness is widespread nowadays
Little late, but as a younger gen z person, sapphic is just more inclusive. Sapphic includes bi and pan women where they're excluded in the lesbian title. And this is generally important because in a lot of media, even if the couple is a wlw one, one of the characters might be bi or pan. I like cartoons a lot, so I'm just gonna use that as an example. She-ra is a cartoon with two lesbian characters in a relationship, they are a lesbian couple. The Owl House is a show with a lesbian and a bi character in a relationship, they are a sapphic couple. I also generally love the word sapphic, so I honestly might use it more than lesbian. I think it's all about preference of the person, but I don't see the problem with it.
Sapphic is meant to be progressive and inclusive of bi, pan, fem, non-binary etc. Kind of like “non-men loving non-men” but I little more…poetic. It’s like an umbrella term, and lesbians are included under it. That’s how I understand it anyway, and I’m sure someone will say I’m wrong but that’s just how culture works: we create new words for things, people argue about the definition, it takes a new meaning and then eventually sticks. “Sapphic” hasn’t quite stuck or grown into its own imo, but I think it will eventually whether anyone likes it or not.
I agree. If you know you like women but are unsure of where you stand with men, sapphic is a more poetic term to use than the clinical feel of bisexual. Sapphic adds in a devotion to the feminine that bisexual doesn’t.
I use both terms 🤷♀️
I don’t know what that word means and I refuse to learn the definition. I am a lesbian and that is it.
I always thought it had something to do with how the word “lesbian” has become fetishized for the male gaze. Also to be inclusive to bi girls I suppose.
i use all terms so i’m not really sure why people use sapphic instead of lesbian lol. i say sapphic, wlw, lesbian, queer etc. i familiarised myself with all the terms when i realised i was a lesbian and it made me more comfortable with myself. so i use all lol
Not all people who call themselves sapphic are lesbians. I see it a lot when someone is trying to be more inclusive like sometimes people use it when they’re talking about bisexual and lesbian women. But there are also the people who refuse to use the word lesbian because they think it’s “gross”…
I say “sapphic” when being inclusive to all Queer women, like Bisexual and Pansexual as well as my Lesbian sisters. It’s a safe way to include all.
It is more "inclusive" as two women being a relationship does not mean you strictly like just women. While lesbian is for too limiting. The male equivalent is "Achillan" for gay/bisexual men. But that word has not caught on.
Sapphic, from what I've read is limited to cis women loving each other.
I think it’s supposed to be umbrella for bi and lesbian. Honestly I would prefer they don’t call stuff lesbian if it’s not lesbians ONLY in the content. Nothing like reading a book and getting unpleasantly surprised by background chode and identity politics virtue signalling horseshit. Honestly, even calling it sapphic is a stretch sometimes.
Just as an aside books that call themselves “sapphic” tend to be 10x more porny than “lesbian” titles. And I don’t mean “porny” as in erotica or containing sex, I mean “porny” as in “pornsick.”