Follow Up: Rich and Rupp

I thought that these two articles were both really interesting. The part that I found really parallel in both articles was the idea of women involved in same-sex relationships. What really caught my attention was the fact that in most cases, same-sex relationships between women always seemed really taboo. Rich says that oftentimes, authors completely ignored the idea of a lesbian sexual identity. I thought this connected to Rupp's article because in most cases, it seemed that sexual acts between women were pushed under the rug or not generally stated. There is a clear history of men having intercourse with one another. There is no embarrassment surrounding it whatsoever. I don't know if it's necessarily embarrassment that keeps women from openly talking about these relationships or coming out and saying they're happening, but there are definitely forces at work that cause women to keep these relationships under wraps. I think what makes that interesting is that men continually seem to call the shots on what's "okay" in society, so if they say that sex between a man and a boy is okay, then it is. However, they had never really outlined what was acceptable between women. In contrast, today, most men seem heavily in favor of women as same-sex couples when it is for their benefit. Since then, we have seen an explosion of girl on girl porn and "Spring Break" trysts. It seems like girls were waiting for the go ahead from men, and now that it is socially acceptable, even asked for, they will be open about it.