(Check out) Top Hot Butches, critiques and responses

[Post has been edited and reblogged]

Top Hot Butches -.jpg

Sinclair’s latest project, Top Hot Butches, was originally a list of


The 100 hottest butch, masculine, androgynous, genderqueer, transmasculine, studs, AGs, dykes, queers, and transguys

Following criticism of the inclusion of trans men in the list, at Sinclair’s place and in Feministing’s comments and elsewhere (including in the comments of the original version of this post), she has removed those trans men who have not specifically given their blessing to be included.

Sinclair’s also posted a statement of apology:

So here’s the thing about the internet: the critical feedback is immediate, and publications are, unlike print, not static. Things do not have to stay the same.

I have decided to remove transmen from the list of Top Hot Butches, and I sincerely apologize to all who felt insulted by their inclusion. I did not want to hurt anyone’s feelings, and I understand how it was hurtful, despite my intentions.

I did expect some disagreement about exactly this, but I did not expect this level of discourse, discussion, openness, and productivity in the response. Look at Feministing, and also at Sugarbutch threads here & here, and the comments on the THB site itself. I also thought I understood my own reasons for the inclusion of transmen, and that my reasoning could hold up against criticism, but in the past three days, I have felt that it does not, and that many of the critiques are right.

I really recommend reading the whole of Sinclair’s apology over at Sugarbutch Chronicles

(And you might also want to check out this response by Jiz Lee, who is on the list)

Meanwhile, prior to this, F-Word reader Sebastian Conolly sent in this contribution, which I’m posting here still because it sets out really clearly some reasons why people objected to the original list. However, Sebastian asked me to add: “Since this was written Sinclair has responsed to similar critiques from elsewhere by removing trans men from the list, and issuing this statement, which I feel has addressed my problems with the orginal list”:

At first glance this list of 100 Top Hot Butches by Sinclair Sexsmith seems harmless enough. Whilst any list which focuses on hotness as a metric is potentially objectifying, as a response to the After Ellen Hot 100 being mostly populated by young, slender, white, femmes, I can see why it could be a positive thing.

A closer look at the subtitle though, and my blood pressure was rising. “The 100 hottest butch, masculine, androgynous, genderqueer, transmasculine, studs, AGs, dykes, queers, and transguys.” Some of these things are not like the others. Some of these things have nothing to do with butchness.

The compiler of the list obviously has some idea that grouping all those labels together as butches might not go down terribly well, and attempts to explain the reasoning behind it, but if anything makes it worse. In particular the phrase “I am using it instead of another term … because I think it is the most accessible and recognisable word representing some sort of female masculinity” is shockingly dismissive of trans men’s identities.

We don’t have female masculinities. We have male ones. And why? Because we’re not some kind of extra-special super butch women. We’re men.

The fact that Sinclair states “I mean absolutely no offense to anyone on this list” doesn’t suddenly make it inoffensive to slap labels on us that we haven’t chosen. It doesn’t make it any less hurtful to be told that we’re not the same as other men, that we’re united to a list by the very accident of birth that we’ve chosen to reject.

I think it’s great that people are celebrating female masculinities. It’s fantastic that the conventions of what makes a woman attractive are being challenged. I just wish that a group which has so often been dismissed as “not really women at all” would stand up for themselves without suggesting that I’m not really a man.

So, what about the list itself? Sinclair says it was direct response to After Ellen’s Hot 100 list:

Yet again, readers of After Ellen chose their top hot list based on contemporary standards of feminine beauty, with a little bit of lesbian pop culture thrown in. Not to mention that the list featured primarily white, straight, young women, primarily from the US. And in this, the year of Rachel Maddow, of New York Times articles on butch fashion, there were fewer than a dozen androgynous, butch, or masculine folks represented on this list.

Hot lists have a bad reputation. And, well, for good reason: aimed at straight men, highlighting and ranking women in the public eye for how conventionally attractive they look, there’s really so much wrong with most of these lists that, well, you could probably write a list of 100 reasons to hate 100 hottest women lists.

There’s been a fair deal of push-back, though. Including the now defunct(?) REAL hot 100 list, which highlighted young women in the US who were “doing incredible things in their every day lives… battling the popular notion that all young women have to offer is outward appearances”.

So, is Top Hot Butches a bit objectifying? The answer, for my money? Well… yes, maybe a little bit… but, Sinclair says:

Being objectified has been an important step on my own way toward gender identity development: being seen as attractive and desirable by others, and seeing representations of people like me in culture who are also desirable, has helped me feel more confident and strong about my own gender.

There is, of course, a constant flow of images in the media validating, and pushing, women embracing femininity (implicitly or explicitly for men, depending on the context), and there’s still most definitely a need to acknowledge and celebrate butch (although this list is also about a broader spectrum of identities). I also like that Sinclair’s list is not just confined to the young and white.

Actually the list (at least the first half of the list) is just as much about what those listed have done as how hot they look. And your Maxim-type list is offensive, not just because it’s objectifying, but because it’s pushing attractiveness as one, single specific ideal (even, kind of ridiculously, pretending that it’s possible to ‘objectively’ identify the hottest woman on Earth). Efforts such as Top Hot Butches should help to disrupt that…

Check out the full list here

Your Comments

Sebastian said:

That disclaimer is bullshit. 'Butch' may be a broad term for female masculinities, trans men don't have female masculinities, we have male ones. You know why? Because we're men.

The 'contraversial' bit sounds about right. But invalidating our identities so you can generate controversy is a lousy cissexist move, and I'm disapponted in the F word for perpetuating it without even a challenge.

Posted on 23 June 2009 at 9:36 AM

Shev said:

I cannot look at these at work. I know what will happen to me if I do. And I know how my colleauges will react to that, and altogether, it won't end well for me. But oh! Maybe it's worth it.

No. Contain yourself, Shev.

*whimpers*

Posted on 23 June 2009 at 11:33 AM

Jess McCabe said:

The comments above were posted on the previous version of this post - I've still approved them though, because I wanted to retain the critique of my original post.

Posted on June 25, 2009 11:44 PM

Jehenna said:

I'm curious - why is it that being objectified is so important to feeling desirable?

Can we not be subjects with agency and be desirable? Or must we always be the passive focus of the subjective gaze, reduced to an object?

Posted on 26 June 2009 at 2:53 AM

Saranga said:

Thanks for the repost. I had a look through the list and was confused as to why there were men on there. I thought maybe I'd missed something. evidently not.

Posted on 26 June 2009 at 9:25 AM

Jen said:

being seen as attractive and desirable by others, and seeing representations of people like me in culture who are also desirable, has helped me feel more confident and strong about my own gender.

Surely it's possible to find someone attractive without objectifying them though? I definitely see where Sinclair is coming from, totally, but I wouldn't consider that objectification, because "object" is in opposition to "subject": when you objectify someone, you deny them their subjecthood, almost like they cease to exist when you stop looking at them.

In that sense, the list is probably (consciously) objectifying, which is fine, because, shit happens, but what Sinclair describes there - well, it's possible to sexually desire someone without denying them their subjecthood, absolutely.

Posted on 26 June 2009 at 9:26 AM

Ariel said:

Moreover, to add insult to injury, many trans men identify as male very strongly, but present as feminine men. Thus they are not within the remit of 'butch', only being put in that category because, somehow, trans men get equated with having, as has been noted above, female masculinities.

Incidentally, I am glad that at least Riki Wilchins is there, as far as I can tell the only trans woman in the list. I mean, at least we exist right?

Posted on 26 June 2009 at 10:40 AM

polly styrene said:

Is it possible to find someone attractive without objectifying them? Certainly. If you find someone attractive but also realise that they're a three dimensional autonomous human being with rights.

However I find it difficult to see how a 'hot 100' list fits with seeing someone in anything but one dimension.

Posted on 26 June 2009 at 12:41 PM

polly styrene said:

Can I also say that the whole 'female masculinity' stuff winds me up. As a female who is described by others as 'butch' looking - enough to be occasionally mistaken for male, I don't regard myself as "butch", "masculine" or male identified at all. If other people do, that's their problem. I'm a female human being. End of.

Posted on 27 June 2009 at 10:55 AM

Have your say

In order to keep this blog as a feminist and friendly space, comments will be subject to some rules. We do not seek to censor debate: the beauty of the internet is that anyone can set up their own blog or website to express their views.

  1. This blog is a safe and friendly space for feminists and feminist allies. Debate and critique are welcome where it is constructive and deepens analysis or understanding. Anti-feminist comments will not be approved. We get to decide what's anti-feminist.
  2. All comments must be approved by one of the bloggers. For this reason, there may be a delay before your comment appears.
  3. No sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic, classist, ablist comments, comments which make personal attacks on any blogger or commenter, or comments that are otherwise deemed offensive by us will be posted.
  4. Trolls will be banned from commenting. We get to decide who is a troll.
  5. No anonymous comments - please feel free to use your real name or make one up, though.
  6. Be nice.

Please note that your email address will not be displayed on this website. All comments are checked, prior to being published on this site.

top ^

Latest Posts
UK survey: 1 In 7 women students have been subjected to sexual assault or violence
Are you a Bad Girl? Mama Says Good Girls Marry Doctors
Women's Liberation Movement @ 40 - Reflections
What is feminism? First survey results
New feature: In conversation with Senzeni Marasela
New review: Daughters of Earth: Feminist Science Fiction in the Twentieth Century
Round-up!
What About Women?
New feature: Writing women back into punk
New feature: Painful vagina? Your poor husband!
More posts
Latest Comments
Justin on Hollywood glass ceiling is shattered, but women are still losing out in film and TV
Troon on UK survey: 1 In 7 women students have been subjected to sexual assault or violence
Helen S on UK survey: 1 In 7 women students have been subjected to sexual assault or violence
sianmarie on UK survey: 1 In 7 women students have been subjected to sexual assault or violence
andieberry on Women's Liberation Movement @ 40 - Reflections
Troon on UK survey: 1 In 7 women students have been subjected to sexual assault or violence
C on UK survey: 1 In 7 women students have been subjected to sexual assault or violence
Jeff on UK survey: 1 In 7 women students have been subjected to sexual assault or violence
Colin on UK survey: 1 In 7 women students have been subjected to sexual assault or violence
Louise on UK survey: 1 In 7 women students have been subjected to sexual assault or violence
More feminist bloggers
There are plenty of fantastic UK feminist bloggers around. For a fantastic introduction to feminist blogging, go to the Carnival of Feminists website, which showcases the finest feminist posts from around the blogsphere, including many from UK blogs.
How to contribute to The F-Word
Got something to say? Something to review? News to discuss? Well we want to hear from you! Click here for more info
Events
Check out our events listings for info on some of the fantastic feminist events going on up and down the country. Please get in touch to tell us about events we've not listed yet.
Small Print
All blog posts are the views of the individual post author, and not those of The F-Word.

Inside this section

Blog Home
Archives by Month
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
More Archives
Archives by Author
Abby O'Reilly
Amy Clare
Anne Onne
Barbara Felix
Bill Savage
Carrie Dunn
Catherine Redfern
Grace Fletcher-Hackwood
Guest Blogger
Helen G
Holly Combe
Jess McCabe
Joanna Whitehead
Jolene Tan
Josephine Tsui
Kate Smurthwaite
Kit Roskelly
Laura Woodhouse
Lola Adesioye
Louise Livesey
Lynne Miles
Milly Shaw
Philippa Willitts
Samara Ginsberg
Sokari Ekine
Sunny Hundal
Suzi FemAcadem
Syma Tariq
Yvonne Howard
zohra moosa
News prior to April 2005
XML feed Feeds
Latest Blog Posts
Latest Comments

Contact Us

This webpage lives at: http://www.thefword.org.uk/blog/2009/06/check_out_top_h